NationStates Jolt Archive

What would you decribe yourself as?

Extremely far-Left. Not far-Left on the American scale, either. That's still Capitalist, which I'm certainly not.

A libertarian capitalist.

By capitalist, I do necessarily imply that I am a captain of industry or that my wealth is particularly substantial or insubstantial to any degree, I infer that my philosophy is one based on the principles of a laissez-faire economy and a laissez-faire society.

Right-wing Socialist.

On most issues I'm to the left, socially especially, but I believe in regulated capitalism and tend to be further right then most die-hard socialists.

Okay, now that the poll's up:

I'm a "Reformist Socialist". That is, I support universal healthcare, free public education, regulated industry, controlled trade, and government-controlled utilities. I also support government housing for the poor.

I am by no means a Communist. I think that people should get as much money as they work for (though the government should give people money if they can't do otherwise). Equal wealth for all, to me, is a failed concept.

New Labour

I support redistribution of wealth, to a point. I believe in universal health and education. I dont believe in government owned industry.

Libertarian Capitalist

Insane and a libertarian capitalist

The poll so far shows a disproportionate number of revolutionary socialists. If these were stratified samples of the world population, red flags would be flying across the board.

I'm glad to see we libertarians seem to have fairly heavy representation here as well, however.

Insane and a libertarian capitalist

Isn't that duplicative? :D

(Joke, people, joke.)

Social Democrat.

Isn't that duplicative? :D

(Joke, people, joke.)
Only if you have fun with insanity it is.
And I do! :D

No idea.
My gut feeling tends to go to extreme left and extreme social libertarian, but I can understand the arguments against leftism as well. I don't know where I fit in terms of politics.

Should I put myself down under Libertarian because I vote LP(I can't stand any of the other US parties, and the LP is one of the few that agrees with me on social policy)?

A dreamer. Seriously, I have no idea what my political views are. Generally liberal (European liberal, not US liberal.)


I can have drastically different views for different subjects, can't really define myself as anything. I'd say liberal is pretty damned vague though.

No idea.
My gut feeling tends to go to extreme left and extreme social libertarian, but I can understand the arguments against leftism as well. I don't know where I fit in terms of politics.

Should I put myself down under Libertarian because I vote LP(I can't stand any of the other US parties, and the LP is one of the few that agrees with me on social policy)?
You voted for Badnarik? :eek: I will probably do the same, well depends on who the canidated are, when I can finally vote. One year baby!

A dreamer. Seriously, I have no idea what my political views are. Generally liberal (European liberal, not US liberal.)


I can have drastically different views for different subjects, can't really define myself as anything. I'd say liberal is pretty damned vague though.
American liberalism is a watered down version of european liberalism isn't it?

Card-carrying member of the Libertarian Party.

(Neo, I had absolutely no idea your votes swung our way! :fluffle: )

What is Third Way?

Right-wing Socialist.

On most issues I'm to the left, socially especially, but I believe in regulated capitalism and tend to be further right then most die-hard socialists.
How is this socialist? "Right-wing Socialist" is an oxymoron. You sound like me, a moderate libertarian. I am centrist on economics, but very libertarian on social issues.

American liberalism is a watered down version of european liberalism isn't it?
American liberalism is called "democratic socialism" in Europe. European liberalism is called "libertarianism" in America.

American liberalism is a watered down version of european liberalism isn't it?

Heavily.

Conservative. Smaller, less interfearing government. Free market with no government control. Heavily based word for word on the Constitution. I wouldn't necessarly call myself a 'Neo-Conservative Christian' though, I am Christian but don't go around trying to convert everyone. That tends to piss a lot of people off from that I have learned.

fascist. with a dash of my own fucked up ideals.
hey- someday it will work. ANYTHING can happen in America.

Card-carrying member of the Libertarian Party.

(Neo, I had absolutely no idea your votes swung our way! :fluffle: )
Libertarians in the house!!!

What is Third Way?


How is this socialist? "Right-wing Socialist" is an oxymoron. You sound like me, a moderate libertarian. I am centrist on economics, but very libertarian on social issues.


American liberalism is called "democratic socialism" in Europe. European liberalism is called "libertarianism" in America.
Many libertarians I know refer to european liberalism as "democratic socialism", but its subjective.

Many libertarians I know refer to european liberalism as "democratic socialism", but its subjective.
Which "liberal" European parties are they thinking about? Liberals here are in favour of a free market and are also fairly socially liberal.

Which "liberal" European parties are they thinking about? Liberals here are in favour of a free market and are also fairly socially liberal.
Usually the German ones. I am not well versed in European politics and I didn't alledge that.

I call myself a liberal.

But here on NS people keep saying I am other things ... :p

... some of them are new words I'm learning ... :D

reformist socialist.

we should have socialism, but not through revolution.

Libertarian Communist.

Libertarian (minarchist laissez-faire free market)

Can anyone tell me what "Third Way" means?

Can anyone tell me what "Third Way" means?

I would, if I knew...

Can anyone tell me what "Third Way" means?

First way = missionary position.

Second way = Oral.

Third way = sodomy (I hear it's fun!)

:D ;)

I see myself as a centrist ... an American centrist ... and most tests I have taken bear that out.

My opinion changes constantly.. today I feel like being a fascist, so that's what I put down. Tomorrow, who knows?

"Right-wing Socialist" is an oxymoron.


I've understood "socialism" to mean a system of centralized control and redistribution of wealth/goods/resources by means of the state. Usually, when the word "socialism" is used, it is meant to imply the redistribution of wealth from rich to poor. However, it is certainly possible that redistribution can occur in the opposite direction, from poor to rich. In fact, I tend to refer to the tendency of large business entites to exact control and influence over government for the purposes of gaining favorable legislation (centralized control), subsidy (redistribution of wealth/goods/resoruces), or other special favors as "right-wing socialism."

It doesn't matter who the targeted class is, centralized planning and redistribution are centralized planning and redistribution.

I would, if I knew...

The "Third Way" was the culmination of various reforms made to what would before have been a center-left set of policies in the America's Democratic party. The party did it largely to gain more votes from an American public brainwashed by conservative media in a 12 year old Republican government and also because Americans were afraid of getting another Jimmy Carter. The Term has also been applied to Tony Blair's New Labour. The British Labour Party had before been a very left wing buinch of democratic socialists while Harold Wilson and James Callaghan had been in government before they reformed themselves into social democrats in the early 80's deciding that their old ways were not good enough for an increasingly demanding global economy, kicking out the Marxists in their party to grab votes from Thatcherite Britain and then again into a Third Way party in 1996 which got their election campaign a far greater amount of corporate funding. They've been like that ever since.

I've understood "socialism" to mean a system of centralized control and redistribution of wealth/goods/resources by means of the state. Usually, when the word "socialism" is used, it is meant to imply the redistribution of wealth from rich to poor. However, it is certainly possible that redistribution can occur in the opposite direction, from poor to rich. In fact, I tend to refer to the tendency of large business entites to exact control and influence over government for the purposes of gaining favorable legislation (centralized control), subsidy (redistribution of wealth/goods/resoruces), or other special favors as "right-wing socialism."

It doesn't matter who the targeted class is, centralized planning and redistribution are centralized planning and redistribution.
Actually socialism is the ownership of the means of production and redistribution by the people. Socialists tend to favour redistribution to raise the poor to the level of the rich, not to make the rich poor and the poor rich. In an ideal socialist society everyone has the same material wealth. Redistribution of wealth alone does not make socialism.

i tend to lean towards Libertarian Socialism, with a few exceptions, but not as extreme as some

The "Third Way" was the culmination of various reforms made to what would before have been a center-left set of policies in the America's Democratic party. The party did it largely to gain more votes from an American public brainwashed by conservative media in a 12 year old Republican government and also because Americans were afraid of getting another Jimmy Carter. The Term has also been applied to Tony Blair's New Labour. The British Labour Party had before been a very left wing buinch of democratic socialists while Howard Dean and James Callaghan had been in government before they reformed themselves into social democrats in the early 80's deciding that their old ways were not good enough for an increasingly demanding global economy, kicking out the Marxists in their party to grab votes from Thatcherite Britain and then again into a Third Way party in 1996 which got their election campaign a far greater amount of corporate funding. They've been like that ever since.
So you're referring to Clinton and his ideological soulmate Tony Blair. I call that right-wing neoconservatism. The only reason people use the term "Third way" is because these leaders came from traditionally leftist parties, and their policies surprised everyone.

Libertarian Communist.
The two terms seem contradictory because communism calls for a centralized government.

The two terms seem contradictory because communism calls for a centralized government.

No.

Communism in essentially anti-state. You are confusing communism with socialism/statism.

No.

Communism in essentially anti-state. You are confusing communism with socialism/statism.
Oh you mean Marxism, sorry.

Oh you mean Marxism, sorry.

No, I mean Libertarian Communism.

A simplified explanation:

http://eng.anarchopedia.org/index.php/libertarian_socialism

So you're referring to Clinton and his ideological soulmate Tony Blair. I call that right-wing neoconservatism. The only reason people use the term "Third way" is because these leaders came from traditionally leftist parties, and their policies surprised everyone.

probably, lol

Liberal and progressive. Just a little communist/Marxist, but mostly I'm neutral on economic issues (that's neutral in Europe, not America).

No, I mean Libertarian Communism.

A simplified explanation:

http://eng.anarchopedia.org/index.php/libertarian_socialism
I see I was stuck on terminology.

What would I be if I were pro-Iraq, pro-Bush, pro-anti-terrorism ( :confused: ), pro-tax cut; but anti-Schiavo staying alive, pro-abortion, and basically socially liberal? On the Schiavo issue, she should be allowed to just die and Congress intervening is unconstitutional. I want to see if I'm as Republican as my parents think I am. Any questions on issues are welcome. I really should make a Schiavo debate topic before she dies.

What would I be if I were pro-Iraq, pro-Bush, pro-anti-terrorism ( :confused: ), pro-tax cut; but anti-Schiavo staying alive, pro-abortion, and basically socially liberal? On the Schiavo issue, she should be allowed to just die and Congress intervening is unconstitutional. I want to see if I'm as Republican as my parents think I am. Any questions on issues are welcome. I really should make a Schiavo debate topic before she dies.
An American centrist perhaps, but my advice is don't be too concerned about labels, they're a dangerous thing.

Voted Facist.

But why cant we just kill her off in a diffrent way? Why does it have to be starvation?

Voted Facist.

But why cant we just kill her off in a diffrent way? Why does it have to be starvation?
If we gave her a shot it would be considered euthanasia which is illegal.

What would I be if I were pro-Iraq, pro-Bush, pro-anti-terrorism ( :confused: ), pro-tax cut; but anti-Schiavo staying alive, pro-abortion, and basically socially liberal? On the Schiavo issue, she should be allowed to just die and Congress intervening is unconstitutional. I want to see if I'm as Republican as my parents think I am. Any questions on issues are welcome. I really should make a Schiavo debate topic before she dies.

Well if you're anti-taxation and anti-big government, and at the same time pro-abortion and pro-rights-in-general, you probably fall into the libertarian capitalist camp, whose beliefs are epitomized in the manifesto of the American libertarian party.

Actually socialism is the ownership of the means of production and redistribution by the people.


And the "will of the people" is represented and enacted through the mechanism of the state. Yes, I have heard people argue that socialism works through anarchism, but I reject left-anarchism for the same reason that I reject right-anarchism ("anarcho-capitalism"). As soon as the "anarchists" are faced by somekind of external threat, they are going to band together in common defense. The "anarchists" might call this cooperation, but I call it the birth of the state.

Socialism or capitalism, it does not matter. The state is inevitable, and the people are going to use it to enact their will. Socialism relies on the existance and action of the state just as much as capitalism does.

This actually why I favor a minimal state that secures individual property rights, with a laissez-faire free market. A minimal state minimizes the ability of some to exploit statist power against others. Individual property rights decentralize the ownership and control of resources to the lowest level possible, again minimizing the ability of some to exploit others. The laissez-faire free market allows individuals to dispose of and trade their property as they see fit, so long as they do so in a peaceful and voluntary manner. If the socialists want to pool their property together into their own collective(s), fine. If the capitalists want to keep their property seperate and trade as individuals, fine. So long as it's peaceful and voluntary.

If we gave her a shot it would be considered euthanasia which is illegal.

I don't know about any of you :P, but I think i'd rather get a shot, then starve to death. Shes not completly brain dead it seems.

A fiscally conservative right wing Liberal.

National Socialist party = NAZI. It would be nice if the political views were listed as people typically know them. Or at least if there was an explanation in the first post.

I voted Revolutionary Socialist although I would describe myself as a Libertarian Communist because I believe in an end to all forms of free enterprise and the creation of a society which is run in the interests of all people instead of private profit. I also believe strongly in the destruction of the state and the importance of true democracy where all people have an equal say over how their society is run and Communism can never be achieved without this.

libertarian capitalist I guess. I wouldn't join the Libertarian party though since Im remaining an independent.

Mine is somewhat complicated. I'm mostly a right-wing liberatarian with a neo-Wilsonian bent in foreign policy. However, you can just call me conservative.

Libertarian socialist.

Libertarian Capitalist, baby!

Freedom (and profit)!

Freedom (and profit)!

Freedom (and profit)!

Freedom (and profit)!

National Socialist party = NAZI. It would be nice if the political views were listed as people typically know them. Or at least if there was an explanation in the first post.
National Socialist does not equal NAZI.

National Socialsm is a political view, or a school of thought, if you will.
There are National Socialists in Japan, who are fighting to shed the Western influence and return to their true Japanese roots.
They are National Socialists, not Nazis.
The Nazis were a political party in Germany from 1923-1945.

I'd actually have to label 'other' for myself, though I think Reform Socialist might come the closest.

I am an economic socialist and a social libretarian.

Reform Socialist. I believe in a socialist democracy, a tightly controlled capitalism, very socially libertarian.
Boo laissez-faire capitalism. Boo consensual crime.

What's the libertanism? I never understood...
Is it communism? Socialism?

National Socialist does not equal NAZI.

National Socialsm is a political view, or a school of thought, if you will.
There are National Socialists in Japan, who are fighting to shed the Western influence and return to their true Japanese roots.
They are National Socialists, not Nazis.
The Nazis were a political party in Germany from 1923-1945.

Nazi Party = NSDAP = Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei = National Socialist.

National Socialists and Nazi are the same thing. National Socialists in Japan would behave the same way, within their own culture, as the German Nazi Party.

Facist.

The National Socialists are screwed up, because they are racist. They give Facists a bad name.

What's the libertanism? I never understood...
Is it communism? Socialism?

Not at all. Libertarianism simply means that one supports liberty in whatever field is being referred to. A social libertarian might support legalization of drugs, an economic libertarian might support lower taxes and fewer business regulations. The American Libertarian party are both social and economic libertarians, they are staunch defenders of laissez-faire capitalism and social freedom.

By 'Third Way,' do you mean political views similar to Col. Quaddafi?

Not at all. Libertarianism simply means that one supports liberty in whatever field is being referred to. A social libertarian might support legalization of drugs, an economic libertarian might support lower taxes and fewer business regulations. The American Libertarian party are both social and economic libertarians, they are staunch defenders of laissez-faire capitalism and social freedom.
If you stretch it a bit you could say its a step above anarchy. Think small government.

By 'Third Way,' do you mean political views similar to Col. Quaddafi?

Third Way usually refers to "social-democratic" centrist politicians like Tony Blair or Gerhard Schröder who have abandoned socialism and now believe in deregulation and free enterprise.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_way

If you stretch it a bit you could say its a step above anarchy. Think small government.

Yeah. "Libertarian" on it's own usually means less government, less tax, more rights, less regulation. If you take the philosophy to its most extreme, you get rape, pillage and burn. Of course, most libertarians support police and military forces as legitimate government functions, to prevent such an occurance.

Usually if "libertarian" is appended by something else (i.e. "libertarian communist", "libertarian socialist"), the inference is of social liberty as oppose to economic liberty. Thus a "libertarian communist" supports wide social freedoms but stringent economic controls.

Third Way usually refers to "social-democratic" centrist politicians like Tony Blair or Gerhard Schröder who have abandoned socialism and now believe in deregulation and free enterprise.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_way

Interesting...I thought it meant the same as Third Positionist, basically what some neo-fascists such as the National Bolsheviks are calling themselves nowadays.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Position

Gah, all these stupid useless terms. :p

Third Way usually refers to "social-democratic" centrist politicians like Tony Blair or Gerhard Schröder who have abandoned socialism and now believe in deregulation and free enterprise.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_way

Okay, thanks.

But didn't Quaddafi call his policies a "third way?"

Third-way democrat. A centrist-leaning liberal.

What would you decribe yourself as?all of the above.
specially thursdays...

Okay, thanks.

But didn't Quaddafi call his policies a "third way?"
Yes, but Qaddafi is a nutcase.

New Labour




YUK YUK YUK, new labour are sellouts to their socialist heritage, they shouldnt be allowed to call themselves the labour party, they betrayed every labour principle in the book

Yeah. "Libertarian" on it's own usually means less government, less tax, more rights, less regulation. If you take the philosophy to its most extreme, you get rape, pillage and burn. Of course, most libertarians support police and military forces as legitimate government functions, to prevent such an occurance.

Usually if "libertarian" is appended by something else (i.e. "libertarian communist", "libertarian socialist"), the inference is of social liberty as oppose to economic liberty. Thus a "libertarian communist" supports wide social freedoms but stringent economic controls.

In case anyone was wondering, the libertarianism I refer to is the liberal extremism where both freedom of enterprise and freedom of social conduct are the name of the game. The closest example so far would probably be Denmark's government, although it's not quite there.

Yeah. "Libertarian" on it's own usually means less government, less tax, more rights, less regulation. If you take the philosophy to its most extreme, you get rape, pillage and burn. Of course, most libertarians support police and military forces as legitimate government functions, to prevent such an occurance.

Usually if "libertarian" is appended by something else (i.e. "libertarian communist", "libertarian socialist"), the inference is of social liberty as oppose to economic liberty. Thus a "libertarian communist" supports wide social freedoms but stringent economic controls.

In case anyone was wondering, the libertarianism I refer to is the liberal extremism where both freedom of enterprise and freedom of social conduct are the name of the game. The closest example so far would probably be Denmark's government, although it's not quite there.

...the libertarianism I refer to is the liberal extremism where both freedom of enterprise and freedom of social conduct are the name of the game. The closest example so far would probably be Denmark's government, although it's not quite there.
If anyone understood all that...fell free to translate...

If anyone understood all that...fell free to translate...

It basically follows the principles of classic liberalism which means that people, particularly business men are free from both the economic restraint of socialism or modern liberalism and the from the moralistic social restraints of conservatism. I personally disagree with it on both counts, firstly because I think that while the morals promoted by Bush's Republican party are nonsense, a set of morals none the less are essential if we are to ensure social cohesion and productivity, secondly because free trade is simply not fair to those less fortunate and because I don't think any human being can do enough to truely deserve millons of dollars.

If anyone understood all that...fell free to translate...

Freedom of enterprise is the right to buy and sell what you want unfettered by government.

Freedom of social conduct is the right to do whatever you want in your personal life, like marry someone of the same sex, or smoke weed, or walk around naked.

That clear it up for you?

Libertarian capitalist moderate. I, as did Adam Smith, see rationale for certain public works. Namely roads and up to secondary education.

I really should make a Schiavo debate topic before she dies.

Who is she?

On the answer to this thread, I don't know the difference between them. But social democrat seems quite good.

You might also call me a minarchist of sorts.

Hm, there needs to be another choice up there. I'd consider myself a socially minded conservative.

National socialist naturally.
I don't usually talk too much about my political ideas because when I do, people start staring at me.
You can also see this by just looking at my country's description:
...the Navy has outraged the international community by sinking a boatload of refugees to prevent them reaching the shore...and the government extracts trade concessions from poor nations in exchange for humanitarian aid...
You got the point...

I'm a libertarian, social capitalist, republican neo-conservative.

Libertarian: Anybody should be free to do whatever they want with their own bodies, or with consenting, rational, adults(s), with no government involvement (except to prevent exploitation of children, the mentally ill, and the non-consenting).

Social Capitalist: I just termed that. Anyway, I believe strongly in free trade, economic freedom, low taxes, and the capitalist economic system. The social part means that I believe everybody should have access to 5 basics: food clothing, shelter, health care, and secondary education. The unemployed are given jobs by the government until they find one for themselves. Health care is privatised but everybody has guarenteed access despite ability to pay, through a public insurance program. Education is privatised but all children recieve vouchers to be used at whatever school they (or their parents) want.

Republican: I believe in a system of governance based on the republic and checks and balances. A government of the people, by the people, and for the people. It also includes a healthy balance between responsibilities and rights.

Neo-conservative: I believe in the promotion of freedom, justice, and peace abroad, through the use of diplomacy, trade, and, if those fail, properly applied, proportional force.

you forgot democratic totalitarians.

you forgot democratic totalitarians.

That's kind of an oxymoron. unless you're denoting someone who is democratically elected for life.

The two terms seem contradictory because communism calls for a centralized government.
Actually communism calls for no government!

What would I be if I were pro-Iraq, pro-Bush, pro-anti-terrorism ( :confused: ), pro-tax cut; but anti-Schiavo staying alive, pro-abortion, and basically socially liberal? On the Schiavo issue, she should be allowed to just die and Congress intervening is unconstitutional. I want to see if I'm as Republican as my parents think I am. Any questions on issues are welcome. I really should make a Schiavo debate topic before she dies.
You would be Ahnuld Schwarzenegger!

In case anyone was wondering, the libertarianism I refer to is the liberal extremism where both freedom of enterprise and freedom of social conduct are the name of the game. The closest example so far would probably be Denmark's government, although it's not quite there.
Denmark's governments tend to be generally social democratic.

Usually if "libertarian" is appended by something else (i.e. "libertarian communist", "libertarian socialist"), the inference is of social liberty as oppose to economic liberty. Thus a "libertarian communist" supports wide social freedoms but stringent economic controls.

i would argue most people who would call themselves libertarian socialists/communists don't see themselves as calling for any particularly stringent economic controls, other than a change in rules about who the proper owners of the means of production are. after that change, decisions are nearly entirely left to either the people who own the means of production or the subset of them who work at a particular workplace/section of a workplace, depending on the kind of decision in question.

Well I voted for Conservative. Very right economically, less so socially. (I'm not a stiff who can't have any fun) You can see the old compass in the sig. ;)

You would be Ahnuld Schwarzenegger!

Not a bad thing to be. Arnie would win if he was allowed to run for president. Cross party appeal, celebrity status, coming from Cali (probably taking that state). Now if only I could convince myself that killing babies is ok just because the mother thinks it is, I'd be in the same favorable situation. I don't come across as conservative as Mr. Compass says I am.