NationStates Jolt Archive

What issues have you changed your mind on? What were the issues, what was or first stance and your current one? What made you change your mind?



Me?


Nudity

First Stance - Rather people keep their clothes on
Now - Don't really care anymore, as long as its not on a kids show I couldn't care less. In some cases I wish there was more naked chicks
Reason I changed - Just sorta happened



Free health care

First stance - Against it and thought it wasn't possible
Now - I am convinced it could be done and not bankrupt the nation
Reason I changed - Research and logic


Free education

First stance - Not beyond grade school
Now - Free pre-k thru 12 and it could be possible in college
Reason I changed - common sense I guess


Stem cell research

First stance - wanted it limited
Now - Unlimited and should be advanced to help cure all ailments and prevent them
Reason I changed - common sense and research

Most things.

I used to be an AGW sceptic; after seeing the often ignorant and discourteous lot I had thrown myself in with and having had a rather nice discussion with a nice old man on the proponent's side regarding the energy required to heat the oceans by 2 degrees Celsius I felt that the proponents were probably right.
And my newly-found (at the time) worship of science and scientists also contributed there.

My political evolution has been bumpy, encompassing rabid right-wing nationalism (and a more benign but equally as wrong patriotism), communism, liberalism etc.
I'm currently a liberal. Reasons for the evolution? Looking round at my comrades at each stage and wondering what drugs they were on and also realising the impracticality of many things in my philosophy at the time.
I still respect many aspects of communism as ideals. It just won't work, so I don't support it.

Oh, and I used to refuse to believe that 0.9 recurring equalled one, and even came up with several faulty 'proofs' to the contrary before I was nailed with a nice proof of the equality. This also probably changed how I felt about mathematics; before it was a pleasant diversion, afterwards it consumed my life. :p

Keep it up and soon you'll be a Democrat, and then you'll be beyond that faux-left-wing rubbish and be a real left-winger, like me!

Keep it up and soon you'll be a Democrat, and then you'll be beyond that faux-left-wing rubbish and be a real left-winger, like me!

Who me? Never, I am still right-wing on some things and don't plan on changing.

That all depends on your point of view.
Mine is made very clear in a debate here (http://wangersandmash.phpbb24.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1041).

I'm Akria, in case you actually bother to read it.

Bah. Time warp.

Most things.

I used to be an AGW sceptic; after seeing the often ignorant and discourteous lot I had thrown myself in with and having had a rather nice discussion with a nice old man on the proponent's side regarding the energy required to heat the oceans by 2 degrees Celsius I felt that the proponents were probably right.
And my newly-found (at the time) worship of science and scientists also contributed there.

My political evolution has been bumpy, encompassing rabid right-wing nationalism (and a more benign but equally as wrong patriotism), communism, liberalism etc.
I'm currently a liberal. Reasons for the evolution? Looking round at my comrades at each stage and wondering what drugs they were on and also realising the impracticality of many things in my philosophy at the time.
I still respect many aspects of communism as ideals. It just won't work, so I don't support it.

Oh, and I used to refuse to believe that 0.9 recurring equalled one, and even came up with several faulty 'proofs' to the contrary before I was nailed with a nice proof of the equality. This also probably changed how I felt about mathematics; before it was a pleasant diversion, afterwards it consumed my life. :p

There is nothing wrong with patriotism.

That all depends on your point of view.
Mine is made very clear in a debate here (http://wangersandmash.phpbb24.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1041).

I'm Akria, in case you actually bother to read it.

Bah. Time warp.

If you want to support other nations above your own, fine, I can't stop you. But I still fail to see how you could not support your nation in anyway or in any sort of manner. Of course of you are from China or some other type of nation I greatly support and encourage your rabid disloyalty and hatred of your people and state.

I simply do not take pride in my nation. If it is doing the right thing then I will support its actions; I merely won't take pride.

There is nothing wrong with patriotism.

Yes, there is.

"Patriotism" demands that we have loyalty to a country not because it is right, but because we happen to have been born there.

Well I used to be what you would call "Anti-Gay" but now I simply don't care what they choose as long as they don't blast it at me. I don't even care if they get married or not, just don't FORCE a pastor or some such person to do it. The reason for this change is mainly because im generally apathetic, and it takes a lot for me to really care about something.

I changed my mind on several things i guess, but there is one that will always stay in my memory

Does Belgium needs to stay one country?
first: Yes of course
now: not at all, the sooner it it broken up the better
reason: i searched intensively for rational reasons to keep it together and, couldn't find one... In stead i find several good and rational reasons to break it up

I changed my mind on several things i guess, but there is one that will always stay in my memory

Does Belgium needs to stay one country?
first: Yes of course
now: not at all, the sooner it it broken up the better
reason: i searched intensively for rational reasons to keep it together and, couldn't find one... In stead i find several good and rational reasons to break it up

Well im not at all familiar with that issue, in fact I have never even heard that people WANTED to break Belgium up. So, anyway, what are those reasons?

Animal rights, from anti- to pro- (at least the utilitarian formulation of them). Eventually I realized I was maintaining my position because it was personally convenient for me to do so, and I abandoned it.

Well sure, but first i need to know if you know anything about the politics in this little country, and what you know if it in general, since else i could tell you things you won't understand since of the complex situation that you potentially wouldn't know...

Well sure, but first i need to know if you know anything about the politics in this little country, and what you know if it in general, since else i could tell you things you won't understand since of the complex situation that you potentially wouldn't know...

I understand a bit more than Kontor here...I gather the problem is between Flanders and Wallona...and one of the two speaks a dialect of French...and that's all I know. What caused them to come together?

Well sure, but first i need to know if you know anything about the politics in this little country, and what you know if it in general, since else i could tell you things you won't understand since of the complex situation that you potentially wouldn't know...

Well, nothing, belgium has never really been that news worthy in the U.S.

dang that will take a while... Please give me a couple of days to make a decent report, or which would be even better discuss this on msn or yahoo or something like that, since then we could have better interaction...

Animal rights, from anti- to pro- (at least the utilitarian formulation of them). Eventually I realized I was maintaining my position because it was personally convenient for me to do so, and I abandoned it.

Well, im pretty much like that, no more cruelty and killing of animals than we need to. For example I support animal experimentation for medical issues, but for cosmetics I fell (silly me it's "feel" not "fell") that its being unnessicarily cruel.

I used to be really religious and somewhat socially conservative...now I'm a socially liberal Agnostic

The monarchy. Didn't used to care, "why change a tradition" and blah blah blah some other apathy. Nowadays I loathe the institution and think that its dissolution is inevitable. The only thing that makes me hesitant is that some want to replace it with a presidential system, which is even dafter.

Icelandic. I used not to be able to stand listening to it. Pàll Òskar has changed my mind.

Religion. I used to think it could be ignored. Now I realise its marginalisation must be actively maintained.

dang that will take a while... Please give me a couple of days to make a decent report, or which would be even better discuss this on msn or yahoo or something like that, since then we could have better interaction...

i have send you a message on your Nationstates account with my e-mail address so we can discuss this if you want ;)

i have send you a message on your Nationstates account with my e-mail address so we can discuss this if you want ;)

I sent you a message too...

Yes, there is.

"Patriotism" demands that we have loyalty to a country not because it is right, but because we happen to have been born there.

Depends on your form of patriotism, really. I certainly think it's possible to be patriotic without being nationalistic or idiotic about it.

For example, I happen to really like my country. As such, I want to improve it and change it for the better.

Bad spelling

First stance: People who aren't dyslexic but still can't spell are a tad on the not-so-bright side or at least have to have some vital part of their brain unexplainably missing.

Now: Meh, alright, maybe not necessarily.

Reason I changed: Boyfriend is a horrible speller but otherwise perfectly mentally non-deficient. I'm still adjusting. :p

Bad spelling

First stance: People who aren't dyslexic but still can't spell are a tad on the not-so-bright side or at least have to have some vital part of their brain unexplainably missing.

Now: Meh, alright, maybe not necessarily.

Reason I changed: Boyfriend is a horrible speller but otherwise perfectly mentally non-deficient. I'm still adjusting. :p

Maybe he is actually mental retarded but you just haven't noticed yet being blinded w/ love and all?

Maybe he is actually mental retarded but you just haven't noticed yet being blinded w/ love and all?
Nope. I checked and all.

Nope. I checked and all.

all I'm saying is until you give him a IQ test, you can't be sure.

all I'm saying is until you give him a IQ test, you can't be sure.
Oh, I'm sure alright. He'd totally pass. :D

Gun Control
Changed to be against it and support rights

Abortion
narrowed area of what I find acceptable from second and first to just first trimester;changed to not wanting them personally (I'm male though, but for my...female companion)

I can't think of anything else...

Oh, I'm sure alright. He'd totally pass. :D
Perhaps he should be here, passing one of the NS tests ... no wait, that might end up horribly.
Still, curiosity abounds. :p

From a general capitalist outlook to a general socialist outlook.

During the course of high school, I took 3 different trips to a boy's and girl's orphanage in Mexico with a church group. These trips initiated an epic struggle between a nascent but strong socialist outlook, and a strongly anti-authoritarian outlook that had been present since at least middle school. They battled it out for years before I stumbled upon the Anarchist FAQ and Kevin Carson's site (http://www.mutualist.org/), eventually leading to a particular Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_%28economic_theory%29).

Then the two sides of my brain went "Woah, really? Cool. Let's get a beer."

I used to oppose both the death penalty and abortion. Now I support both.

Call me "pro-death" :p

From being a hard core democrap, to being a greenie, and from being a more liberal, modernist Christian, such as Marcus Borg, to being a more 1st century type of Christian, like the apostles.

Oh, where to begin?
Seriously, if I think back long enough, I've probably changed my ideas about anything and everything at one point or another.

Let's just take the things I changed ever since I've been on NSG :

Religion : I started on NSG considering myself to be somewhat Catholic. Meaning I never seriously considered thinking about it, and that was what I had been brought up as. Thanks to that Christians on NSG, I'm now a confirmed atheist with very little patience for most religions.

Gun control : After long dicussions on here, I think that what works very well in Europe probably wouldn't work quite as well in the US. The majority there seems to be willing of taking the risks of being shot for having the freedom of carrying a gun. As it's not really my country, and as I most certainly don't intend on going there anytime soon, I decided to consider it their problem, not mine.

USA : With the experiences and contacts I had had before, I didn't exactly hold that country in high regards. That has changed somewhat.

Creationism : I guess it's fair to list that here. Until I came to this forum, I had never even heard of the concept. There's so much rampant stupidity out there...

I used to be pro-Israel but I got fed up with their rubbish and am about equally annoyed with both Israel and Palestine. I ignore the region now.

I don't consider my change from socially conservative to liberal as much of one as I was about eleven and knew nothing whatsoever about politics. Well, okay, that's still the same, but still... :p

As for me, I use to be socially conservative who is now Socially liberal and I used to be a Democrat, then a Republican, once I realize that both parties sucked, I became a Libertarian. Finally after much soul searching and thought, I came to the realization that Jesus Christ isn't the only way to 'Heaven' or a peaceful afterlife, that all Religion (except Scientology) is valid.

First Stance: Wanted To Rule Universe
Now: Want To Rule
Reason I Changed: The Universe is to big for one person as it rightfully belong to all NSGERs and no other mortals.:p

Since I've been on NSG, there have been a couple things:

First Stance: Capitalism is a necessary evil, and should be kept, in the form of the welfare state.
Now: Capitalism must be abolished.
Reason I Changed: Capitalism cannot be reformed.

First Stance: The state is a necessary evil.
Now: Smash the state!
Reason I Changed: Direct democracy ftw.

I used to say that abortion was totally wrong and should not be allowed, but I thought about rape situations and lifes being in danger during pregnancy and now changed my mind completely. I still kind of think you shouldnt but not if it speacial circumstances.

I wouldn't say I've U-turned on any issues, more like refined my opinion on many through greater awareness and knowledge. Although, I am currently in the process of U-turning on whether my existence alone is enough to justify whether I deserve a happy life, though this is in an emotional rather than political sphere.

Not sure really. Still a whining leftie though.

I've changed my mind on most things over the years, as I got hold of and considered more evidence and/or information on various subjects.

The most recent major change that I can think of are my feelings on (hand)gun control over the last 10 years or so. I went from a "private ownership of guns is indefensible" stance, through an apathetic "just don't care" phase, and now find myself with a sort of "handguns are just specialised tools - allow private ownership in tandem with tight regulation and review" attitude.

Oh, and I also find myself experiencing a vague desire for an independent Scotland, an idea that I'd always dismissed when I was younger... I still haven't pinned down exactly why.

Contraception
Used to be: Against. No to sex before marriage!
Now: For, go ahead and have sex! Be careful of babies and STDs!

Abortion
Used to be: For, totally. Kill 'em fetiiiii!
Now: Against, except in certain circumstances.

Porn
Used to be: Ban it all! No porn! Porn is bad!
Now: Meh.

Death Penalty
Used to be: Kill 'em!
Now: No, it's better that they rot in prison.

Religion
Used to be: *prays*
Now: Meh.

Universal Health Care
Used to be: That's not compatible with a great economy!
Now: Hey, it's feasible, you know?

and more more more stuff...

Believe it or not, but I used to be a committed, anti-American, anti-market leftie.

So basically I travelled from a -7, -4 political compass score to about +8, -7 or so.

There is nothing wrong with patriotism.

Heh I used to belive that, but I changed my mind. Patriotism is a huge bar to any sort of global understanding.

Keep it up and soon you'll be a Democrat, and then you'll be beyond that faux-left-wing rubbish and be a real left-winger, like me!
Democrats are faux-left-wing.

Who me? Never, I am still right-wing on some things and don't plan on changing.
Judging by your sig, you are socially conservative and economically left-wing, which is precisely the right way to go. :cool:

Christianity. Original opinion
Christians are nice people that I somewhat admire for their selflesssness and generosity.
What changed ?
Forums and other debates with their representatives. Over and over and over again lies, deceit and other bad stuff (tm) formed the brunt of their arguments. I also got sick of the constant "embrace Jesus and be happy" preachers, read the books of other religions and studied some philosophy and ethics.
Current opinion
While it is wrong to denounce all Christians as lying filth adhering to an inferior moral system, their representatives make it so hard sometimes. Fortunately I still feel guilty when I fail to distinguish between groups.

Yes, there is.

"Patriotism" demands that we have loyalty to a country not because it is right, but because we happen to have been born there.

What about those who change nationality...I know of people who are able to be patriotic towards a country they have moved to and gained citizenship.

Believe it or not, but I used to be a committed, anti-American, anti-market leftie.

So basically I travelled from a -7, -4 political compass score to about +8, -7 or so.Indeed.

I'm a green social democrat if that makes sense.

It must've been the rebirth that did it. :p

Judging by your sig, you are socially conservative and economically left-wing, which is precisely the right way to go. :cool:Except for the socially conservative part, that is.

The monarchy. Didn't used to care, "why change a tradition" and blah blah blah some other apathy. Nowadays I loathe the institution and think that its dissolution is inevitable. The only thing that makes me hesitant is that some want to replace it with a presidential system, which is even dafter.

Icelandic. I used not to be able to stand listening to it. Pàll Òskar has changed my mind.

Religion. I used to think it could be ignored. Now I realise its marginalisation must be actively maintained.

you have a TG

Rather than go through different issues, I'll just tell you how my political stance has changed.

Conservative - I was pretty young, didn't know better, was still mildly religious.

Joining NSG, I then started becoming more liberal, without changing my economic views (I basically didn't have any).

I left NSG for a bit, smoked some pot, became some sort of weird communist, but didn't really give it too much thought. I then started reading up on economics and actually getting into politics for real this time, learned that my views were some what ill-informed, decided to completely change my view on the role of government in economics and became a libertarian (basing it on the fact that I still for some reason actually liked the idea of a commune, and thought it could still exist under libertarianism without the need of force etc..). At this point I rejoined NSG.

After more studying in college, I decided that all these ideals were really a load of bollocks, and started looking for practical solutions in governance and economics, so here I am now. Center right economically, left wing socially.

Vanillia ice cream to Chocolate ice cream.

It must've been the rebirth that did it. :p
Oh my, I better make sure my nation never gets deleted or I'll end up on the same trajectory. :eek:

Yes, there is.

"Patriotism" demands that we have loyalty to a country not because it is right, but because we happen to have been born there.

You understand that country, and government are too different things. If you care about you country, you would oppose rubbish or intolerant governments.

If you care about you country, you would oppose rubbish or intolerant governments.

Or you would support "her," right or wrong.

That seems to be the more popular choice anyway.

Believe it or not, but I used to be a committed, anti-American, anti-market leftie.

So basically I travelled from a -7, -4 political compass score to about +8, -7 or so.
:o What went wrong? And could this horrible transformation ever be reversed?

Except for the socially conservative part, that is.
No, I actually prefer socially conservative comrades (I am socially centrist myself), because they are less susceptible to go through the transformation that our dear Leonstein friend has suffered.

No, I actually prefer socially conservative comrades (I am socially centrist myself), because they are less susceptible to go through the transformation that our dear Leonstein friend has suffered.

On what basis do you say that?

If you care about you country, you would oppose rubbish or intolerant governments.

So? Can't we have a government genuinely representative of the country that nevertheless is awful to others?

No, I actually prefer socially conservative comrades (I am socially centrist myself), because they are less susceptible to go through the transformation that our dear Leonstein friend has suffered.

I'm highly socially libertarian myself, and my economic "transformation" was exactly the opposite of Neu Leonstein's. I went from right to left. Thus, your assumption concerning the value of social conservatism is at least highly questionable.

A tendency toward social libertarianism implies a tendency toward valuing skepticism and being critical of ideas, to whatever extent. It also implies a tendency toward valuing human liberty, even if those of us on the left and right sides express reasonable disagreement concerning the exact form a free society would/should/could take.

What springs to mind is having a sexuality other than hetero. But I mainly attribute once thinking that everyone who isn't straight is really nasty to a combination of immaturity and the heternormative western culture I find myself in :)
Other than that, all that comes to mind is God.

:o What went wrong? And could this horrible transformation ever be reversed?


I hope not. Social libertarians are much too rare in the economic right-wing as it is.

Democrats are faux-left-wing.


Nicely put.

On what basis do you say that?
Personal experience. Every single libertarian I ever met was either (a) always a libertarian, or (b) started out as a socially liberal leftist and later became a libertarian. On the other hand, I've never met a socially conservative leftist who ever turned into anything other than a leftist. I therefore consider them more dependable.

For the record, I started out as a left-leaning social democrat with some socially conservative views when I first became interested in politics, back in my teenage years. My first ever political compass score was around (-6, +2). Then I became increasingly left-wing and increasingly socially liberal, even borderline anarcho-communist. My political compass score reached something around (-9, -6) and stayed there for a long time. Over the last few years I finally went that last mile to a perfect leftist score of -10 on the economic scale of the compass, but at the same time I drifted very quickly upwards to around -1 on the social scale. I've been hovering around the (-10, -1) point for a couple of years now and that's probably where I'll stay.

I hope not. Social libertarians are much too rare in the economic right-wing as it is.
Are you kidding? They're a dime a dozen, at least on the internet.

Besides, I was talking about him rejoining the left, not becoming more authoritarian.

Global Warming:

First: Used to believe it and think it was a serious threat

What Changed: There is a lot of debunkery to it, and now that Al Gore's movie was so successful EVERYONE is jumping on the bandwagon. It's crock.

Universal Health Care seemed like a good idea

What Changed: Again a lot more reason to show it's a bad idea. No choice of doctor, overly high taxes, long waits for care, lack of adequate staff and equipment.

NationStates was a great place:

It's full of idiots on both sides of the spectrum that think they know everything.

NationStates was a great place:

It's full of idiots on both sides of the spectrum that think they know everything.

This is different from the real world, how? At least here they don't get TV shows!

I'm highly socially libertarian myself, and my economic "transformation" was exactly the opposite of Neu Leonstein's. I went from right to left. Thus, your assumption concerning the value of social conservatism is at least highly questionable.
No, because I wasn't implying that there is some kind of correlation between social conservatism and leftism. On the contrary, socially conservative leftists are the rarest political orientation in the Western world.

But it seems that social conservatism tends to make a person less likely to change their views, whether those views happen to be left or right. I value allies that I can depend upon not to switch sides, so I value social conservative allies.

A tendency toward social libertarianism implies a tendency toward valuing skepticism and being critical of ideas, to whatever extent. It also implies a tendency toward valuing human liberty, even if those of us on the left and right sides express reasonable disagreement concerning the exact form a free society would/should/could take.
Hmm, you seem to be implying that one's standing on the social scale determines whether they are friend or enemy. I think that one's standing on the economic scale determines whether they are friend or enemy. Capitalist libertarians are my enemies just as much, if not more so, than fascists (because frankly I'll take Mussolini over Mogadishu). Stalinists, on the other hand, are estranged and sadly misguided comrades-in-arms, not enemies.

Global Warming:

First: Used to believe it and think it was a serious threat

What Changed: There is a lot of debunkery to it, and now that Al Gore's movie was so successful EVERYONE is jumping on the bandwagon. It's crock.

Universal Health Care seemed like a good idea

What Changed: Again a lot more reason to show it's a bad idea. No choice of doctor, overly high taxes, long waits for care, lack of adequate staff and equipment.

NationStates was a great place:

It's full of idiots on both sides of the spectrum that think they know everything.

Regarding global warming, why?

Are you kidding? They're a dime a dozen, at least on the internet.


I was talking about libertarians, not Republicans who read Ayn Rand. Actual libertarians are, in fact, fairly rare on the economic right-wing.

Global Warming:

First: Used to believe it and think it was a serious threat

What Changed: There is a lot of debunkery to it, and now that Al Gore's movie was so successful EVERYONE is jumping on the bandwagon. It's crock.
Yawn. People who equate Al Gore with Global Warming are so last year.

NationStates was a great place:

It's full of idiots on both sides of the spectrum that think they know everything.

Can't be that bad if you still post here, eh?

But it seems that social conservatism tends to make a person less likely to change their views, whether those views happen to be left or right. I value allies that I can depend upon not to switch sides, so I value social conservative allies.


I value people who can demonstrate an ability to think for themselves, rather than just do what they are told. They might think and choose differently than me, but that's the price one pays for not being an automaton.


I think that one's standing on the economic scale determines whether they are friend or enemy. ...Stalinists, on the other hand, are estranged and sadly misguided comrades-in-arms, not enemies.

I would think it more important to oppose all those who would imprison, oppress, or kill me outright. Regardless of which ever economic ideological nonsense they use to justify it. Frankly, I simply don't know how to respond to the idea that Stalin is preferable to the present liberal capitalism in terms of "friends" or "enemies." I don't.

I've changed a lot. I went from paleoconservative (of the Barry Goldwater variety) to quasi-totalitarian (authoritarian on political issues, liberal on social and economic issues) to libertarian to anarcho-capitalist to hybrid of monarchist/anarcho-capitalist/feudalist. On some days I am border-line centrist or apolitical altogether, but usually am a liberal (in the classical sense, of course) on the far right.

On the other hand, I've never met a socially conservative leftist who ever turned into anything other than a leftist.

So? How many socially conservative leftists have you met in total?

Certainly it seems to me that Leninists in the West have a definite tendency to become conservative later in their lives.

Yawn. People who equate Al Gore with Global Warming are so last year.
Last year is just less than two weeks ago. :D

I value people who can demonstrate an ability to think for themselves, rather than just do what they are told. They might think and choose differently than me, but that's the price one pays for not being an automaton.
Are we talking about friends or allies here? You seem to be talking about valuing people in the sense you value friends. I was talking about dependable allies. Those are two different things - some people are both friends and allies, but it is also possible for a person to be only one or the other. I have capitalist libertarian friends. I do not have capitalist libertarian allies.

I would think it more important to oppose all those who would imprison, oppress, or kill me outright.
99% of social conservatives, including some of the more extreme ones, would not advocate an outright police state, let alone murder.

Look, I come from Eastern Europe, I'm old enough to remember what a real totalitarian society is like, and every time a social liberal gets all panicked and tries to make it sound like present-day Western social conservatives advocate a totalitarian society, I don't know whether to laugh in his face or just shake my head in disbelief.

Nothing advocated by anyone in the United States or Europe today comes even close to being totalitarian, so please cut back on the hyperbole.

Regardless of which ever economic ideological nonsense they use to justify it.
Nonsense? Economic issues are the most important issues in politics.

Frankly, I simply don't know how to respond to the idea that Stalin is preferable to the present liberal capitalism in terms of "friends" or "enemies." I don't.
I said he was preferable as a political ally, not as someone to rule your country.

And I said "Stalinists," not "Stalin." Stalin himself was a particularly untrustworthy individual.

Last year is just less than two weeks ago. :D

Good call. ;)

Oh my, I better make sure my nation never gets deleted or I'll end up on the same trajectory. :eek:Just maybe. :)

No, I actually prefer socially conservative comrades (I am socially centrist myself), because they are less susceptible to go through the transformation that our dear Leonstein friend has suffered.Even if this is the case, it would make them more likely to move back from right-libertarianism to leftism. Even still, they wouldn't be authoritarian, which is good in and of itself.

I've gone from being a homophobe to being pro-gay marriage. And I like stem cell research now. And I've decided that mash potatoes are now the spawn of satan.

I have capitalist libertarian friends. I do not have capitalist libertarian allies.


To the extent that a capitalist libertarian opposes the oligarchic state, I would most certainly consider him or her an ally. We are likely to part ways once that state is removed, but in most cases I still see an allied relationship. Or, at least, I don't consider hostility or opposition as a necessity.


99% of social conservatives, including some of the more extreme ones, would not advocate an outright police state, let alone murder.


I wish I could believe that.


Look, I come from Eastern Europe, I'm old enough to remember what a real totalitarian society is like, and every time a social liberal gets all panicked and tries to make it sound like present-day Western social conservatives advocate a totalitarian society, I don't know whether to laugh in his face or just shake my head in disbelief.


I don't claim that anything in the "West" is totalitarian, at least not to the same extent that existed in Eastern Europe. I can, however, see similarities in tendencies and policy prescriptions, and where they lead down the road. I can also listen to the experiences of people like yourself and decide that going no where even remotely in that direction would be best. It is not a matter of being "panicked." It is a matter of taking liberty seriously exactly because of what has happened in the past.

EDIT: Actually, having given it some more thought, I can claim that many an aspect of the "West" is totalitarian, or at least authoritarian. American foreign policy, focusing on militarism, Abu Ghraibs, and Guantanamo Bays come to mind. Extraordinary rendition, so that torture can be conducted without actually being conducted *cough*. United States history is also characterized by frequent support for totalitarian regimes when it served "national" (i.e. economic) interests. And one need only visit the inner city ghetto to see the systematic oppression and discrimination against very specific racial and economic classes. Indeed, the "West"'s totalitarianism is even more dangerous in that it lives beneath the surface where the majority of those lucky enough to have been born into the "correct" racial and economic classes will never have to look at it. Unless they purposefully take a helicopter ride out to the reservation.


Nonsense? Economic issues are the most important issues in politics.


Economics is an important aspect of our society and its politics. Politicians' ideologies designed to cause me to accept their methods because I agree with their economic ends, however, tend to be nonsense.


I said he was preferable as a political ally, not as someone to rule your country.


If he is not fit to rule your country, I would wonder why one would consider him an ally in the purpose of ruling a country ("politics," as it were).



And I said "Stalinists," not "Stalin." Stalin himself was a particularly untrustworthy individual.

Is one actually trying to argue that Stalin himself is not representative of Stalinism?

I wish I could believe that.



I don't claim that anything in the "West" is totalitarian, at least not to the same extent that existed in Eastern Europe. I can, however, see similarities in tendencies and policy prescriptions, and where they lead down the road. I can also listen to the experiences of people like yourself and decide that going no where even remotely in that direction would be best. It is not a matter of being "panicked." It is a matter of taking liberty seriously exactly because of what has happened in the past.


Not really. When you boil down the fundamentalists' argument, it basically amounts to giving creationism equal status with evolution, and increasing the status of Christmas. Rather unintimidating when you consider real life totalitarian fanatics. And eastern Europe was invaded by a hostile ideology. Revolution never happened within. There aren't a good deal of similarities between the rise of the right here and the rise of communism there.

When you boil down the fundamentalists' argument, it basically amounts to giving creationism equal status with evolution, and increasing the status of Christmas.

And sending gays back into the closet and women back into the kitchens.

Rather unintimidating when you consider real life totalitarian fanatics. And eastern Europe was invaded by a hostile ideology.

My post has been edited. The "West"'s totalitarianism does not affect most "Western" citizens (except for the non-male, non-heterosexual, non-white, non-rich ones). Why would the invader attack its own citizens, after all.

It's crock.
Wrong.
Tease me, please me!