Political Views

Where do you stand politically when it comes to the issues facing society? Which would you honestly identify yourself as, a liberal or a conservative?

For the most part I like to think of myself as being pretty much in the middle, almost to the point of being politically apathetic as I feel there's too much self-righteousness and a "my way or the highway" attitude on both sides, making compromise impossible and solving nothing. That's why I enjoy shows like The Simpsons and South Park so much since both sides are mercilessly mocked, even if both shows aren't quite in the middle.

Mind you, I would have to say that my views tend to be more liberal so I can't claim to be completely in the middle. However, I harbour the same disdain for left wing groups such as PETA as I do for right wing groups such as the Parents Television Council. Groups with that level of bias, whether liberal or conservative, are so self-righteous and unwilling to see the opposite point of view (or support any other causes but their own, while demanding that everyone support their cause) that I simply cannot sympathise with their views.

*standard, liberal and conservative are not opposites, traditional left-right political spectrum is meaningless, only has statists and is of zero use by anyone sane, etc. rant* (See the last page of Obama-McCain thread. I think. If you really care you can find it.)

I feel there's too much self-righteousness and a "my way or the highway" attitude on both sides, making compromise impossible and solving nothing

That's the best way. Political division protects freedom. Whenever interests of the state agree, it's never for giving the people back or letting them retain their freedom.

Well, the point of the thread was for people to state (and perhaps even discuss) where they stood on various issues facing society. If "liberal" and "conservative" are terms too generic and meaningless for the topic then by all means substitute more appropriate terms and definitions.

I already did? Liberal and statist. (Modifiers? Individualist/Collectivist, Conservative/Progressive, Evolutionary/Revolutionary.)

Anyone interested can just go look into the thread I mentioned. But alright.

So then you ascribe to the discredited, nonsensical political spectrum taught most commonly by the state.

In which we have two poles, one of which is "social control, economic freedom" commonly ascribed to Republicans, or "conservative" and the other being the opposite, ascribed to Democrats and "liberals."

This runs into an endless series of problems.

First, where is an authoritarian who believes in social and economic control? In the middle. Where is the person who believes in social and economic freedom? In the middle.

Second, conservative isn't the opposite of liberal. It is the opposite of progressive. Liberal is the opposite of statist.

Third, both positions on the poles are untenable. You cannot have social freedom without economic freedom and vice versa. So it is meaningless to ascribe any value to either of the absolute pole values.

Fourth, it refuses to be properly setup and then borrows the language of completely different spectrums. Fascism was the "right-wing" of the Socialist spectrum, wanting socialism nationally instead of internationally, desiring to control business but not nationalize them, etc. Somehow the Nazi's and Mussolini became free-marketers when it was decided the "right-wing" of the political spectrum is Fascism, and the "left-wing" is Communism. While it was also decided "libertarians" (formally known as liberals) and "supply siders" were "right-wing" even though both of those are anti-collectivism.

Politically then, we are better off aligning ourselves, not along this single spectrum that makes zero sense and is historically confusing (Jefferson would be a "moderate", Stalin would be a "moderate", Hitler would be a "moderate", Henry would be a "moderate", Ron Paul is a "moderate" both anarchism and totalitarianism are "moderate" stances) and instead definining political traits over a series of spectrums and restructuring the primary one.

First, would be liberalism vs. statism. Free markets, free "pursuit of happiness", less government and therefore less dangerous corruption versus controlled markets, state-ordered society and power/corruption.

Where do you stand politically when it comes to the issues facing society? Which would you honestly identify yourself as, a liberal or a conservative?

For the most part I like to think of myself as being pretty much in the middle, almost to the point of being politically apathetic as I feel there's too much self-righteousness and a "my way or the highway" attitude on both sides, making compromise impossible and solving nothing. That's why I enjoy shows like The Simpsons and South Park so much since both sides are mercilessly mocked, even if both shows aren't quite in the middle.

Mind you, I would have to say that my views tend to be more liberal so I can't claim to be completely in the middle. However, I harbour the same disdain for left wing groups such as PETA as I do for right wing groups such as the Parents Television Council. Groups with that level of bias, whether liberal or conservative, are so self-righteous and unwilling to see the opposite point of view (or support any other causes but their own, while demanding that everyone support their cause) that I simply cannot sympathise with their views.

I agree with everything you have said and I feel the same exact way. Also, I may add, in this time and age, there is not a single politician that isn't, even in the least significant of ways, corrupt. Not where I come from anyway. There hasn't been a single politician who's put his duties as a leader before his self interest in over fifty years here in Italy (more than a hundred in Argentina.)

I also consider myself to be near the middle.

You can't just define yourself as a moderate.

Especially if you aren't going to define the poles.

I am a nothing. I don't care about politics either way. I have to vote, being compulsory here, but I've resorted to doing my own write in votes come election time.

I just think all politicians are corrupted, if not by money then for their ego. The truely great people in this society like Martin Luther King or David Robinson, the people that should be leading society, aren't.

I'm tempted to donkey vote or even abstain and pay the $20 fine but I've yet to do it.

an ultra conservative in some areas in othersw i would be considered extremely liberal. so i guess a conservative leaning moderate

Classical liberal, and yes, as benji says the entire liberal-conservative left-right spectrum that everyone uses is just varying degrees of statism...it's a terrible shame that certain views such as my own cannot be represented on such a scale, and that it's so widespread.

So this spectrum is misrepresenting? If so, what's the "correct" political scale model. If it exists?

When it comes to elections and parties are trying to get my support, I would think that I have an open enough mind to hear them out... at the end of the day though, I would sway more towards the 'conservative side'? Is that what you would call it if I vote for Labor just because I like their policies and theory more?

I'm not really into the political scene but being in Australia, you are forced to take note during certain times.

Those axis aren't even labeled. What is X? Y? What does "conservative" mean? What does left mean? What does right mean?

Is it like most people do a social/economic axis?
Then why is fascism on the right?

Indeed, I reject the seperation of freedoms into economic/social/political freedoms. You cannot have social freedoms without economic and political freedoms, you cannot have political freedoms without economic and social freedoms, and you can guess the last one.

Left ------------------------------------------------------ Right
Statism -------------------------------------------------- Liberalism
or if you prefer:
Liberalism ----------------------------------------------- Statism
Maybe:
Collectivism --------------------------------------------- Individualism

When it comes to elections and parties are trying to get my support, I would think that I have an open enough mind to hear them out... at the end of the day though, I would sway more towards the 'conservative side'? Is that what you would call it if I vote for Labor just because I like their policies and theory more?

I'm not really into the political scene but being in Australia, you are forced to take note during certain times.

Labor defines itself as centre-left, which according to Wikipedia:

includes social liberals, social democrats, democratic socialists, progressives and also some greens. Centre-left supporters accept market allocation of resources in a mixed economy with a significant public sector and a thriving private sector. Centre-left policies tend to favour limited state intervention in the economy in matters pertaining to the public interest. The centre-left also often favours moderate environmentalist policies and generally, though not universally, supports individual freedom on moral issues.

When it comes to things like stem cell research, euthanasia and gay marriage both the Labor and Liberal parties appear to be on the same page though.

Labor has various different factions in their party. Kevin Rudd is very much of the left wing spectre, but the party itself is like a buffet of ideologies. This can be good or bad, but that's why you tend to see more fighting within the ranks of Labor then the other parties.