How would you describe your political alignment?

Post Reply New Topic

I think Sanders has some socialist tendencies---but I don't think he's really that close to being a Trotskyite (which is a relatively benign Communist, as compared to the Stalinist variety).

Hillary has some rightist tendencies--especially in the fact that she enjoys power.

I think of somebody on the "left" to be a person who is relatively close to being a Socialist/Communist. The definition of a "leftist" is getting more and more "right."

I don't think of a moderate/Reagan Republican as being too much to the "right." Rush Limbaugh leans that way, but is not a true "rightist."

I have no idea what Trump is. He's a mishmash.

I take my opinions from right wing, alt right, left, and libertarion.

Political alignment is a service performed yearly on brains in November by untrained media technicians.

Not sure.

Whoever is talking the most sense at the time.

Growing up as a child I wanted everything to be free as most kids were, so I was conspicuously infiltrated with a communistic mindset (who had no idea what ideologies were) until early adolescence when I studied business management in secondary school, and learned a great magnitude of the significance that private enterprise has for society as a whole, this inexorably led to my "illusionary" and unbridled acrimony to government taxation as a means for sufficient national infrastructure management and public services, but quickly realized its purpose according to the common knowledge of the indoctrinating degenerate pseudoscience of modern "conventional economics" (mainly the debt based monetary system) when in reality (it will be proven in the future) it is completely unnecessary for at least 95% of the time (Bradbury Pound).

Since early adolescence, I was completely apolitical until mid to late 2012 when I surreptitiously got involved with the British newspapers and international political forums. After the hullabaloo that I endured by critically analyzing their disputations, I adopted a center right position. I repudiated the SJW/Regressive Left (prior to these loaded linguistic philosophical terminologies came to prominence) vs Religious Fundamentalist right/Far Right horseshoe theory (I tended to be an irreligious right wing atheist who opposed Radical Traditionalism and Cultural Marxism; yet was a devout supporter of the neurodiversity movement and autistic rights activism at the time, before I even heard of the two terms); as well as the expatiated argumentum ad nauseam central planning vs market economy discourse (although I leaned to favour the market most of the time) after being completely bewildered over one out of the many traditional false dichotomies in political science that is the left and right paradigm. I also became skeptical of the corporate mainstream media's credibility for these very reasons and no longer give them any of the minuscule amounts of trust, even though I still dissent with many of what the alternative media complex claims to this day.

From late 2012 until 2015, I became a UKIP supporter and as a result adopted libertarian leaning right wing populist ideology, then some time later in early 2014 I took a deeply engrossed interest in libertarianism, and in June 2014 I succumbed to American congressman Ron Paul's red herrings about laissez faire capitalism, Austrian Economics, and the "blessed pulchritudes" of the gold standard (a highly scarce bimetallic commodity abandoned after the great depression), although I still love many of his constitutional liberties and his individual freedoms that he advocated. Ron Paul is of course well beloved by many in the ideologically overlapped "truther movement," the liberty movement and the right wing constitutional militia and patriot movements in the United States.

June 2014 - October 2015: Austro-libertarianism (strictly and orthodoxly in the tradition of the heterodox economists Ludwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard), Conservatarian Minarchism (Conservative Libertarianism), and Social Darwinism (Laissez faire variety); even though simultaneously I was a working class welfare recipient (a good old case of special pleading, cognitive dissonance and the No True Scotsman paradox ).

In September to October 2015, after a few months researching another movement opposing "precious metal commodities" like gold and silver currency in monetary reformist discourses, I subsequently left Austro-libertarianism and became an advocate of Sovereign National Credit (debt and interest free paper currencies like the Bradbury Pound, Colonial Scrip, the Guernsey Experiment and a modified variant of Lincoln's Greenbacks); an ideological hybrid of libertarian individualism and paleoconservative nationalism (disaffiliated from the Austro-libertarian segmentation of the liberty movement), as well as a staunch form of business nationalism and lastly, and more imperatively, an ardent opposition of corporate economic globalization ("free trade", goldbuggery, international finance, foreign interventionism, collectivist wealth redistributionism, financial capitalism, supranationalism, outsourcing, asset stripping etc.) viewtopic.php?f=33&t=84183&p=6944635#p6944635

Since 2016, I would now describe myself as non-conformist** and independent freethinker (not the "skeptic/freethought" movement); profoundly introverted, misanthropic, agnostic (I'm a believer in Darwinian Evolution, but can't be certain whether or not there's a deistic creator, or whether the whole universe is one behemoth of a holographic computer simulation), and a staunch believer in natural law, rule of law, self sufficiency and meritocracy. I advocate a productive sovereign decentralized market economy, national and economic independence (Individual Entrepreneurship, Economic Democracy, Localism: decentralized planning and small as well as medium productive businesses dominating the economy and economic nationalism; which incorporates central planning as-well as the free enterprise markets in the national interest; these may be construed as extremist positions in the commensurable minds of skeptics/"freethinkers", "conventional economists" and bankers, but they are in ideologically conditioned denial of the unavailability of such a middle ground between this and corporate economic globalization (it's nothing but plutocratic neo-feudalism) and international development, two of the most insurmountably biggest hoaxes ever perpetuated by the international elites which are exacerbated by the international debt based monetary system, to say they are "extremist or partisan based" would be committing the nirvana fallacy, as well as argument from moderation and the fallacy fallacy), a staunch anti-globalization policy (there is no middle ground on the debates of cultural egalitarianism, multiculturalism, open borders and corporate economic globalization as I've mentioned antecedently I'm afraid) and a repudiation on false dichotomies such as the neurodiversity/autistic acceptance vs biomedical/cure (even though I'm very proud to be autistic/aspie) discourse on ASD's; Individualism vs Collectivism (I support individuality and a pertinent balance between individualism and the common good; but not ideological collectivism, which includes Randian Objectivism and Libertarian Individualism - the expoundation between these two extreme positions are highly subject to Argumentum ad dictionarium rhetorical strategic misuse in think tank conferences and daily online political argumentations) and the central planning vs market economy paradigm as I have referred to antecedently (robust national infrastructure bases and public services can be funded by government creation of debt and interest free currency by the national treasury, once the Bank of England (Federal Reserve US equivalent - both privately owned national banks), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) (all three are supranationalist financial institutions) are seized and abolished, the stringent proscribement of fractional reserve banking and usury (to greatly demonopolize the private commercial financial sector, first by stringently regulating it, and then allowing locally funded public banks like the one in the US state of North Dakota to compete with them to see if it has any legislative purpose in a post-global economy, and if it works over-sufficiently as a natural monopoly, then private commercial banking would be gone for good) is implemented, and an intelligently designated and highly simplified taxation system is put in place to take out overproduced money out of circulation to restrain any inflation hindering the national economy (e.g. high degree of tariffs on international trade; particularly pertaining to cheaply produced goods from countries with no worker's rights, unproductive, cheap labour, currency manipulation and diminutively effective infrastructure), instead of taxing individuals and small to medium businesses to death with all of these regressive and complex multifarious taxes (income tax, council tax, VAT, National Insurance Contributions, inheritance tax, business rates tax, fuel duties, road tax, the deplorable TV licence, excise and duties tax, and even corporation tax and more). This is what I believe on how a national economy should function properly and I'm far from alone who believes so and so.

** I oppose:

-Ideological Groupthink (ideologocracy)
-Political Philosophies (including social constructionism)
-Organized Religions (including New Religious Movements (NRM's), humanism, theocracy, fundamentalism, cults and the Christian "countercult" movement)
-Social Movements (including those based on Collective Group Identity and New Social Movements (NSM's)
-Collectivist Identity Politics (including the Culture Wars and Identitarianism)
-Divide and Rule Isms/Ologies/Movements/Ocracies/Labels/Ists/Schisms
-Alternative Lifestyle Subcultures (nothing nonconformist about them, hence that juxtaposing the definition of "nonconformist" with a movement, 99.9 percent of ideologies (including the labels) and subculture would be oxymoronic Orwellian doublespeak)
-Modern Conventional Economic Paradigms (National Debt, Austerity, Extortionate Taxation, "Free Trade", Wealth Distributionism, Foreign Aid, Central Banking (Both Private and Public), Austrian vs Keynesian Hegelian Dialectic, "Balanced Budgets", Quantitative Easing, "Budget Deficit", GDP, Economic Globalisation, Socioeconomic Status etc.)

Somewhat to the left of center.

Libertarian. I don't ascribe to either rightist or leftist groupthink, though I lean quite right on some issues, (small government, and limited beaurocracy) and quite left on a lot of social issues, though unlike leftists, I think running to the government to fix problems is a horrible idea.

I went with left, because the far left has the tendency to float into lunacy, just as the far right does. The left or right of center tends to be too cozy with the social and financial establishment, I think. The left are the true movers and shakers for progress, whether that is concerning civil rights, expanding medical coverage, etc.