WP support thread for apoliticals or ppl w/unusual views

Post Reply New Topic

If anyone is interested, I'm starting a WP support thread for people who are antipolitical (anarchists or think-everyone-is-full-of-crappists), apolitical (the adamantly, admirably apathetic), or politiweird (strong libertarians, transhumanists, monarchists, those generally out of the mainstream).

The purpose of the thread is raising awareness about how annoying, conformist, and corrupt both dems and reps are, and how we hate people trying to recruit us.

I am becoming more and more apolitical the more knowledge I gain, the more I see through the big elaborate smoke-and-mirrors con we call politics or "civilization". We were more civilized before civilization actually. People lived in relative peace (and some even say a possible Utopia) before the rise of Sumeria, the imposition of money systems and religion (religion was a control devise created by the psychos exploitation of peoples' yearning to connect to a divine spirit or divine conscience). They bartered and lived in small tight-knit tribal units. If a tribal leaders became corrupt his people could easily over-power him.
I don't even think human nature was naturally THAT bad, I think it's been manipulated and contorted over so many generations and thousands of years of propaganda from this psychopathic system. I think we f****d up a long time ago when we let psychopaths manipulate their way into building this control grid we call "civilization".

People say "humans are animals". Yes, that is true, but one thing sets us apart. We were given the ability of critical thinking and reasoning. We were also given free will..... Slowly those things have been slipping away, from generation to generation. People are so many thousands of years removed from their conscience it's monolithic.

I've yet to meet a monarchist, but I don't think it would be a horrible system- probably better than what we have now, actually. I'm not quite anarchist, but my political views are somewhat shaped by Austrian economic thought, so they're a ways out of the mainstream.

I'm some sort of theist zen-buddhist jungian pacifist "body environmentalist" political-apathist.

I've met 2 monarchists although one has switched to anarcho-capitalism.

Nice thread though. I am politi-weird and probably a bit anti-political as I tend towards anarchism. I am not sure I am so opposed to people trying to recruit me, I sometimes like a political discussion, but yes, I do not like the mainstream.

I would say I'm probably politically quite weird too. I tend to have a libertarian streak with hints of monarchism.

Society of today is a highly complex thing....i guess

Society is full of lots of little cliques put together like Venn diagrams.

Wow... changing from monarchism to anarcho-capitalism seems like a pretty big shift. But who am I to comment, after switching from Democratic Socialism to moderate Austrian Libertarianism?

Actually, it really is not necessarily so much of one. Austrian economist Hans Hermann Hoppe has written positively of monarchy while deriding the democratic position seeing one as private ownership of the state and the other as public. A radical shift would be fascism to anarcho-capitalism.... and I think I have undergone that one.

I suppose so, and I could deal with enlightened despotism along the vein of Frederick II. Fascism to anarcho-capitalism... yup, that's a pretty big shift, probably even more so than my socialist to laissez-faire capitalist switch.

Woo! Yeah!

I hold some transhumanist philosophies, and I have a notable libertarian streak.

Philosophically, I believe in anarchy, but in practice, I am a libertarian. I think that the government should be scaled down drastically, and it should not be able to restrict people's natural rights.

I am also against centralized government. I believe that if governments are more localized, then interaction between people and the state would be more efficient - the governors would be able to more readily respond to the people's wishes, and the people would be able to keep their respective governments in line. The state governments would generally not interact with each other, and hopefully this would lead to less conflicts, as only individuals would be interacting through traveling and trade.

I hate capitalism, but I'm not entirely socialist. I don't think that the government should have a monopoly over businesses, but at the same time I dislike the practices that large corporations will go through to keep their pocketbooks lined with as much cash as possible. I'm also very troubled by the growing divides between the rich and poor - it makes little sense to me why some should live in excess while others have to struggle to survive.

Same here - also I think it shouldn't be possible to pass a law which is valid for an unlimited amount of time, after a certain time, the law needs to be checked and modified if necessary - also political parties should dissolve 30 years after being elected for the first time.

Oh, just what we need: more lack-wits who can't define their political views beyond, "somewhere between here and there," and more fringe nerds who just want to style themselves as "different." You are not rebels, you are not independent-minded, and you are not inherently smarter than people you count as liberal or conservative. Nine out of ten of you are just as much political pawns as the lack-wit "progressives" and small-minded "conservatives" you despise.

I guess you'd count me as "politiweird." I'm an outright pragmatist. I won't accept strategies that just plain don't work. This goes for "minarchism" as well as what I call "blind socialism." I have the same stance toward so-called "centrists." Whether or not you count a view as lying "between the extremes," it's still BS if it counts as BS. If it is untenable, you should call it untenable.

It seems to be a distinct trend that conservatives and so-called centrists alike tend to see me as a liberal and talk to me as if I'm on-board with every hare-brained socialist scheme that happens to be popular at the time. Good for you: you reveal yourself as small-minded. I'm sure your mother would be proud.

I won't call myself a centrist, though, because most of them I've seen just want to style themselves as infallible judges of what constitutes fairness and moderation. If the only premise on which you make a decision is that it lies between here and there, though, perhaps you're just plain lost.

I just want the country to run smoothly, just as I want my own neighborhood to run smoothly. Like anyone, I am moved by factors that influence a human being, such as compassion, finances or my love for my own liberty. I try to satisfy them all to the best of my ability, but some of these are going to take precedence over others. I'm not always going to know which, though, until I'm faced with a hard decision.

My chief complaint with ideologues, whether they're leftist, centrist, conservative, libertarian, or tribalist is that, if you so much as suggest that you disagree with them, they are going to treat you as a mindless pawn of some enemy that exists only in their minds, whether it's socialism or male-chauvinism. Personally, I'm not on board with either conservative bean-counting or waste for its own sake. I'm not on-board with centrists, either, because I feel that I should be allowed to have opinions where I feel they're warrented. I think it's small-minded to base one's views on "somewhere between the extremes" because, from time to time, the "extreme" is going to be right.

If we're going to be extremist about anything, though, let's be extremist about making our country a better place to live. We all have differing interests and priorities, but that shouldn't discourage us from trying.