Political Views?

[Cynthia]

Where do we all stand politically?

Just for the sake of everyone knowing. I'm not asking why your way is "right", or why others should follow, I'm asking where you stand, and why you stand there. There's no need to bash others or what they think, let them be "ignorant" as some call it and be happy with it.

Me personally, I'm really just undecided on EVERYTHING. I really can't say I stand in any particular way in either party, or lean towards either. Some say I'm a liberal, but really, I think I'm more of just an asshole. I like big government things failing, and people pissed off at the government, so really no matter how the system fucks up, I'm a happy camper to see that the higher order isn't working.

What about you?

[Zanarkin]

i never believed in politics. as mosts of the times politicians promise just to get up there but then do nothing of what they say they were going to do. i never put attention to politics things unless they mess with something that i care about in which i just get mad but never do anything about it.

[Gordon Freemeow]

Aye, I assume we're talking about American politics?

Personally I don't follow them. I'm not American, so the way America does business matters not to me, as I have no say in the matter. Quite annoying when I see other brits or people not in America arguing over American politics. The American centralized point of view shall never die I suppose.

I'm not a big fan of law and government myself. Fuck all police, and down with all riot teams. They suck at keeping the neds off of the streets they claim they wish to do so badly.

[Celice]

As far as American "politics" go, it's quite funny to watch people defend right/left/liberal/conservative/republican/democrat shit and not really understand what any of it means other than mythical figure heads making profit off your petty bickering and actions.

It's like a "good" career choice, only the sheep are even more gullible.

[Der Kommissar]

I'm an evil atheist liberal.

[Raven]

I don't really follow any political parties. Where I come from, there's... Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Green Party, amongst other parties.

Although when it comes to elections, it always almost always turns into Labour vs Conservative, with any other Government groups trailing behind them.

On a personal level, I vote for Labour. Aside from liking their policies more than any other government's, my Great Grandfather used to vote for them, and I plan to keep voting for them in his place.

[Phoenix Wright]

All-liber-al.

[quanta]

Libertarian/Republican basically. Although far more important than ideological lines is that whatever is done should work and without unintended or unnecessary consequences. Obviously what's a worthy goal though is also an important judgment to make.

[Defeatist Elitist]

I'm an evil atheist liberal.

This.

I'm very much for social freedom, as I have made clear many times on this board, as long as it doesn't interfere with other people and their rights.

I rarely go into my fiscal views around here (mainly because I know I'll disagree with a lot of people, often on what are essentially subjective grounds), but I am fairly left leaning. To summarize, I believe some things probably should be nationalized, and, at least at its basics, I believe in redistribution of wealth. I have various models of how an ideal society would function in my head, but since I can't really put any of them to test, they may well all be shitty.

I live in Canada, and while I would like some changes (both fiscal and social), I'm cool with how we are now (especially fiscally, I'm not so fine with the social aspects).

So I guess I'd be a Democratic Freedom Loving Socialist? :P

Edited August 25, 2009 by ZXValaRevan

[California Mountain Snake]

Aye, I assume we're talking about American politics?

Personally I don't follow them. I'm not American, so the way America does business matters not to me, as I have no say in the matter. Quite annoying when I see other brits or people not in America arguing over American politics. The American centralized point of view shall never die I suppose.

No, no one implied that this was about American politics, the topic asked for political views, not party affiliation.

As far as American "politics" go, it's quite funny to watch people defend right/left/liberal/conservative/republican/democrat shit and not really understand what any of it means other than mythical figure heads making profit off your petty bickering and actions.

It's like a "good" career choice, only the sheep are even more gullible.

As much as it is prone to corruption, you must realize this polemic-level over simplification does nothing to explain the actual function of our government. I hope you're smarter than a blathering "Big Brother is Watching You"-ite and can realize that the system has nuances beyond what a soap-box demagogue will tell you.

As for myself, I tend to support the maximization of individual liberties in a pretty off-the-tap reading of Locke and various philosophers. Even "libertarians", who are supposed to represent this idea in American politics, tend to falter when it comes to actually representing their beliefs (Ron Paul is staunchly pro-life, and Bob Barr fucking sponsored DOMA). This combined with the fact that the American electoral system is completely incompatible with third parties (Duverger's law, single-member voting districts) and thus voting third-party is asinine, I tend to go Democrat rather than Republican, because despite some of the things Republicans (allegedly) agree with, such as non-interference in personal affairs, liberalized economics, etc., they do a damn good job representing the evangelicals and contradicting their own platform by trying to regulate people's personal lives as it concerns marriage, abortion, etc. If I were to be a Republican, it's definitely the New Hampshire "Live Free or Die" Republican (who more resembles a libertarian) rather than the wing-nut Southern evangelical Republican (who more resemble Mahmoud Ahmadinejad).

So because of this, in various threads of this forum I've argued for things like large scale drug legalization, against a seat belt law, and in general the right to inflict self harm because of one's fundamental ownership of their own body (although I recognize the exception made by parents to control their children up to a certain age). I don't get all bent out of shape about the idea of nationalization or taxation, however, as long as it is justified and doesn't rule out a free market response (IE, I don't agree with a public healthcare plan that restricts people to the government plan and forbids companies from offering an alternative, but I do support the idea of a public option offered by the government). I believe in the strength of a stable democracy to represent the people's views, and if something ever goes too awry in government electoral dynamics will force change because candidates will be elected on promises to fix the problems in government (despite people's sphincter-clench inducing squealing at these national healthcare town meetings, our government is never going to turn into a "Stalinist socialist state" against the majority's will).

But despite how fervent (or vulgar) I may get while arguing on the internet, which I do largely for fun, I do not have these tendencies in real life. I avoid political discussion at most junctures, mostly because I like having friends (IRL) and because I already know how I want to vote and consider other people's votes their own choice. I tend to allow my political philosophy to influence my moral philosophy, causing me to act out my beliefs in every day life (ENFP :\). I often do what I believe is right rather than what the rules or sometimes the law says is right, IE jump fences, smoke pot, etc. I don't go out of my way to break the law, byt I tend to go where I please and do what I please (but of course respecting someone's authority if I get caught). I generally follow two main rules in life:

If there isn't a sign saying no, you're allowed to do it [unless it's blatantly illegal].

and

If you don't ask permission, no one can say no.

Which basically lets you get away with a lot more than most people will let themselves do. This ties into my political philosophy because I'm always surprised at how willing so many people are to give up freedoms they have, or fail to recognize the freedoms they have in everyday life, and so politically I tend to support reduction of unnecessary rules and regulations to help people realize that they don't need to restrict themselves as much as they do.

Edited August 30, 2009 by California Mountain Snake

[Celice]

As much as it is prone to corruption, you must realize this polemic-level over simplification does nothing to explain the actual function of our government. I hope you're smarter than a blathering "Big Brother is Watching You"-ite and can realize that the system has nuances beyond what a soap-box demagogue will tell you.

As I do you.

Edited August 25, 2009 by Celice

[Kedyns Crow]

Socially liberal, economically conservative.

[Fruitloop Multipuck]

Quasi-libertarian who wants to break up the United States.

[Phoenix Wright]

Quasi-libertarian who wants to break up the United States.

Stop hating on us.

[Fruitloop Multipuck]

Quasi-libertarian who wants to break up the United States.

Stop hating on us.

...Who am I hating on, exactly?

[Phoenix Wright]

Quasi-libertarian who wants to break up the United States.

Stop hating on us.

...Who am I hating on, exactly?

Sorry, I misread your post.

[Agro]

On a personal level, I vote for Labour. Aside from liking their policies more than any other government's, my Great Grandfather used to vote for them, and I plan to keep voting for them in his place.

Sounds like a really crappy reason to make a vote.

I'm a Liberal through and through, though it's probably because I'm a middle-class citizen. Whenever Labour is in power in Australia, things tend to go badly and the Labour government seems to be all about face and no action. I support most of the Liberal ideals and whatever else they pull out.

On the other hand, Australian politics tends to be made of bullshit.

is a prime example of the mindset of the majority of Australians.

[quanta]

Off-topic, but I have to bite

I don't get all bent out of shape about the idea of nationalization or taxation, however, as long as it is justified and doesn't rule out a free market response (IE, I don't agree with a public healthcare plan that restricts people to the government plan and forbids companies from offering an alternative, but I do support the idea of a public option offered by the government). I believe in the strength of a stable democracy to represent the people's views, and if something ever goes too awry in government electoral dynamics will force change because candidates will be elected on promises to fix the problems in government (despite people's sphincter-clench inducing squealing at these national healthcare town meetings, our government is never going to turn into a "Stalinist socialist state" against the majority's will).

I honestly cannot think of a single industry that has been improved by "public competition" (I wouldn't be shocked if there was one or two, but that's certainly not the norm as far as I know). In a sense, public competition has all sorts of ridiculous advantages due to its nearly limitless source of funding (the government, and by extension, other people's money) and often relative immunity to oversight (see: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). These advantages have lots of nasty side-effects. Unless you really need the clout of government and that sort of ridiculous funding (for example, you're building a national highway system) or there are reasons that no private solution exists (like with scientific funding, although I wonder if a change of system could reverse this situation), I'd argue it's really not preferable to bring in full-blown taxpayer supported bureaucracies and systems that clearly exceed the more basic functions of government. It's kind of like trying to nail together a couple pieces of plywood with a sledgehammer. It's not very efficient, and a lot of plywood around the nail gets damaged. Yeah, not a very good metaphor, but I'm tired.

A government competitor doesn't really accomplish what most politicians in America claims it does (although it accomplishes something else that I believe some people want). The only way the current plan for creating a government payer makes any sense is as A) a huge redistribution of wealth (in which case why are we handing health care out to everyone?) or B) as an extremely long-term plan to cut costs (because it sure as hell doesn't save any money in the next decade or so) by leveraging the advantage of taxpayer money into an eventual nearly or actually single-payer system (AKA a monopsony which is not an economically optimal situation especially when that monopsony is the government itself) a la most of Europe and then rationing artificially scarce care by a method other than money (basically by waiting times and through a command economy system).

As it stands, for I forget which version of this government health-care plan, the tax penalty on employers had the consequence of creating an incentive for employers to dump their employees into the state system (i.e. it was cheaper to pay the penalty than provide a health care package).

And although I understand why it's best for the Democrats' goals to pretend there are a whopping 2 options of A)current screwed up system and B) new government plan, it doesn't sit well with me to pretend like we don't already know that things like the artificial disparity between taxation of employer-based healthcare and individual-based healthcare screw up the current system. Competition between insurers is partially prevented by the fact you can't sell insurance across state lines, etc. And for chrissakes, why is it goddamn impossible to figure out what I'm paying for exactly on my stupid healthcare bills? Help the billing system make some goddamn sense (not that hard, just require some itemization of costs), do some work on making sure insurance contracts are readable by the average human being in a reasonable amount of time, stop segregating markets to prevent competition, let people get the same tax breaks for individual care, and get medical malpractice costs under control. If that doesn't lead to better results for most people (although I'm fairly confident it would), then let's consider something more radical.

Not that I can count on Republicans to actually act like well, Republicans supposedly should act, but it'd be nice if once in a while somebody would try a few commonsense adjustments, instead of all this crap where one party runs around like goddamn chicken little screaming about how the sky will fall if we don't do crazy shit while the opposing party sticks their heads in the sand and blithely claims "there is no problem, everything's great".

Why is healthcare for my dog so cheap (and yes, it is relatively cheap compared to human healthcare even with the same drugs and treatments sometimes) and quick, but human health care is so screwed up? (For those of you following, this is a rhetorical question; I grasp many of the differences- not all of which can actually be adjusted).

Edited August 26, 2009 by quanta

[Jyosua]

I am an Agnostic Social Liberal, that believes in separation of church and state, gay rights, abortion, and other such social issues as these. As far as economics go, I think we should put harder taxes on the people in the highest of tax brackets, because while yes, it is their money that they rightfully earned (most of the time), they also usually only earned that money because of the capitalist portion of the system of government they are using and taking full advantage of, and therefore rightfully should pay taxes on such wealth. I don't believe in taxing the poor as much (though they obviously need to give something at least), because harder taxes on them just widens the gap between poverty and high class, and eliminates the middle class even more. Because of this, I tend to be in favor of lower sales taxes as well. I also believe in social government systems such as Social Security, and hopefully soon, Universal healthcare, because while a great portion of the American system is Capitalist, in reality the government is supposed to be a balance between Socialism and Capitalism, so the social aspects like Universal healthcare which would alleviate a lot of pain from people struggling to afford healthcare, and overall likely improve the economy a bit by giving the majority of people (which tend to be the middle and lower classes) more money in their pocket to hopefully spend, since they'd no longer need to worry about healthcare, I tend to be in favor for. This tends to mark me as a stark democrat, but there are some issues, like weapon laws, that I take a different stance on. For instance, I think that with guns and rifles, these should be perfectly legal to own or buy, so long as a very efficient and thorough screening process is done on people purchasing them or getting a license to use them. I see no reason to ban such things, as this would effectively force the underground market for them to grow exponentially, and become out of hand anyways. Also, I tend to be in favor of any alternative energy sources other than oil, because let's face it, it's a limited resource, pollutes the environment, is expensive, and overall is just a pain in the fucking ass. That's pretty much all I can think of to sum up my political views.

[Raven]

On a personal level, I vote for Labour. Aside from liking their policies more than any other government's, my Great Grandfather used to vote for them, and I plan to keep voting for them in his place.

Sounds like a really crappy reason to make a vote.

You underestimate how much I respected my Great Grandfather.

I heard from him myself how Margaret Thatcher fucked over the coal mining industry, which the majority of the middle and lower class of the population relied on at the time.

Besides the past of other governments and my decision to vote in place of my Great Grandfather, as I said, I agree with Labour's policies more than any other government's.

So to me, it really isn't a crappy reason.

[burning_phoneix]

I don't have any political views because that's illegal where I come from.

[Jyosua]

I don't have any political views because that's illegal where I come from.

XD Poor Phoneix.

[Celice]

On a personal level, I vote for Labour. Aside from liking their policies more than any other government's, my Great Grandfather used to vote for them, and I plan to keep voting for them in his place.

Sounds like a really crappy reason to make a vote.

You underestimate how much I respected my Great Grandfather.

I heard from him myself how Margaret Thatcher fucked over the coal mining industry, which the majority of the middle and lower class of the population relied on at the time.

Besides the past of other governments and my decision to vote in place of my Great Grandfather, as I said, I agree with Labour's policies more than any other government's.

So to me, it really isn't a crappy reason.

Just be conscious of making a decision over allowing another's to usurp your own. Your grand father lived. This is your turn.

[Crystal Shards]

I don't think religion has anything to do with my political stand, so I'm not mentioning it.

That said, I don't think I really have a label. I take issues as they come.

[Jyosua]

I don't think religion has anything to do with my political stand, so I'm not mentioning it.

That said, I don't think I really have a label. I take issues as they come.

We're not asking you to label yourself, but rather to state your views on several important issues, in an attempt to figure out your line of thought with most political issues. This is what I believe is meant by "Political View". If this was not meant, then that's silly, labels are stupid.