Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Where do you fall on the political spectrum?

Page 5 of 7 [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Where do you fall on the political spectrum?
Right 9%  9%  [ 3 ]
Center-Right 12%  12%  [ 4 ]
Center 15%  15%  [ 5 ]
Center-Left 65%  65%  [ 22 ]
Total votes : 34

TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

14 Mar 2011, 1:26 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:
For all your annoying misconceptions on politics, Inuyasha, I agree with you on this one.


Are they misconceptions though, I actually do pay a lot of attention to politics. While Orwell claims Fox News is not a legitimate news service, Obama's overreactions whenever Fox reports something leads one to believe that Fox News actually has the President rattled.

I mean seriously they (the White House) had Shirley Sherrod fired with no looking into the situation because they were afraid Glenn Beck would start talking about it. Which Glenn Beck didn't get involved until he had all the facts and said the White House was out of line for firing her. Seriously, that is not something you do if you think Beck is a just a blowhard. It looks like Beck has honestly got Obama rattled.


I'm not in the mood to debate your misconceptions, Inuyasha.


_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.


TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

14 Mar 2011, 1:27 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

And that notion you've just espoused about liberals and liberty is just another right wing talking point, and nothing more.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I'm sorry, but I'm of the opinion that neither side is really for liberty.


_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

14 Mar 2011, 1:37 pm

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

And that notion you've just espoused about liberals and liberty is just another right wing talking point, and nothing more.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I'm sorry, but I'm of the opinion that neither side is really for liberty.


I agree. One could theoretically be a 'liberal' dictator. Liberty is an entirely different issue, and liberal or conservative, at least in the US these days, doesn't seem to matter much


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,151
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Mar 2011, 3:54 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Tequila wrote:
TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:
I'm what many would call socially liberal, but the thing is liberal means to want more government involvement and I believe the government should be as small as possible for the size of the country/state it governs.


Not necessarily. The definition of liberal is simply to mean that one supports liberty - i.e. freedom. In the US, the word has been appropriated by the social liberal/social democrat cause.

You sound like a minarchist libertarian. Libertarians are liberals too. There are all different kinds of liberalism.


Sorry but liberals do not support liberty, it is just the latest name the far-left has chosen in their long line of changing names.


And that notion you've just espoused about liberals and liberty is just another right wing talking point, and nothing more.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


:roll:

Pushing for government to control things is not pushing for liberty.


Government doing things for people, such as making sure our water is clean, and that those with disabilities are taken care of, hardly constitutes the government controlling everything.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

14 Mar 2011, 3:57 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Tequila wrote:
TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:
I'm what many would call socially liberal, but the thing is liberal means to want more government involvement and I believe the government should be as small as possible for the size of the country/state it governs.


Not necessarily. The definition of liberal is simply to mean that one supports liberty - i.e. freedom. In the US, the word has been appropriated by the social liberal/social democrat cause.

You sound like a minarchist libertarian. Libertarians are liberals too. There are all different kinds of liberalism.


Sorry but liberals do not support liberty, it is just the latest name the far-left has chosen in their long line of changing names.


And that notion you've just espoused about liberals and liberty is just another right wing talking point, and nothing more.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


:roll:

Pushing for government to control things is not pushing for liberty.


Government doing things for people, such as making sure our water is clean, and that those with disabilities are taken care of, hardly constitutes the government controlling everything.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I agree. Infrastructure oversight and health care are direct manifestations of what the people want, as the government essentially is the people while companies without oversight are not, and though with some notable exceptions of good management, can often work against realistic needs & interests due to primarily a profit motive


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

14 Mar 2011, 4:33 pm

Although "Liberal" and "Liberty" certainly have the same etymological origins, I agree that they aren't really related. "Liberty" and "Freedom" these days are political buzzwords used to make any idea sound good and push a point. Anyway, the guys who push "Liberty" tend to be the Republicans (except having the Freedom to get an abortion, marry someone of the same sex, etc.). Of course, the Republicans do make sure that those who are broke are "free" to starve on the street. Basically, Liberty can mean whatever the Left or the Right wants it to, because it sounds good. Honestly, I'm tired of it. Anyway, it's more practical to have the right to "Peace, stability, and good government" as in Canada then "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

14 Mar 2011, 5:05 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Sorry but liberals do not support liberty, it is just the latest name the far-left has chosen in their long line of changing names.


You never heard of…

Classical liberalism
Market liberalism
Social liberalism

…and so on?

Many liberals are right-wing and would call themselves libertarians these days. It's in the US where the meaning has been corrupted to mean the left-wing.

There are right-wing (free market) liberals, centrist liberals and centre-left liberals (social liberals).

I myself am a liberal but am in no sense a leftist. I believe in classical liberalism.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

14 Mar 2011, 5:32 pm

@ Tequila

The term liberal has long since been hijacked by the left.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,151
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Mar 2011, 5:38 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
@ Tequila

The term liberal has long since been hijacked by the left.


Or, you could argue that the 19th century liberals eventually evolved into the present day left by the 20th century.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

14 Mar 2011, 5:50 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
@ Tequila

The term liberal has long since been hijacked by the left.


Or, you could argue that the 19th century liberals eventually evolved into the present day left by the 20th century.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


This is more what I believe happened. In any case, I consider myself Conservative on the basis that I like my government to be conservative when taking action.


_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.


AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

15 Mar 2011, 3:29 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Or, you could argue that the 19th century liberals eventually evolved into the present day left by the 20th century.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I agree. The thing that everyone has to consider is that when the Liberal movement first formed it wanted change. It's just that at the time change meant a allowing everyone to vote and supporting Industrialization/Capitalism, rather than an agrarian/feudal system. Those changes have all been made (in the West, anyways). So those who support continued change still call themselves liberals.

Conservatives do not want change. They wanted the government to remain an oligarchy and to protect the interests of the landed classes. Well, that didn't happen and eventually it became clear that we probably won't be going back. However, there were still people wanting further change (liberals) and staying the same now meant embracing society as the liberals have made it. Thus, classical liberalism does look much like today's conservatism. It's not that the Left has corrupted the meaning of liberalism it's just that the liberal movement has gradually grown from the Center or Center-Right more to the Center-Left and the conservative movement from Far-Right more to the Center or Center-Right.

I don't know if I articulated that well, but when you look at some of the history of politics (especially in Britain, which I'm most familiar with, even though I'm Canadian) that's sort of what happened.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,151
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

15 Mar 2011, 4:46 pm

AstroGeek wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or, you could argue that the 19th century liberals eventually evolved into the present day left by the 20th century.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I agree. The thing that everyone has to consider is that when the Liberal movement first formed it wanted change. It's just that at the time change meant a allowing everyone to vote and supporting Industrialization/Capitalism, rather than an agrarian/feudal system. Those changes have all been made (in the West, anyways). So those who support continued change still call themselves liberals.

Conservatives do not want change. They wanted the government to remain an oligarchy and to protect the interests of the landed classes. Well, that didn't happen and eventually it became clear that we probably won't be going back. However, there were still people wanting further change (liberals) and staying the same now meant embracing society as the liberals have made it. Thus, classical liberalism does look much like today's conservatism. It's not that the Left has corrupted the meaning of liberalism it's just that the liberal movement has gradually grown from the Center or Center-Right more to the Center-Left and the conservative movement from Far-Right more to the Center or Center-Right.

I don't know if I articulated that well, but when you look at some of the history of politics (especially in Britain, which I'm most familiar with, even though I'm Canadian) that's sort of what happened.


Well said. I was a history major back in college, and I can agree that the historical record backs you up.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

15 Mar 2011, 9:51 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
AstroGeek wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or, you could argue that the 19th century liberals eventually evolved into the present day left by the 20th century.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I agree. The thing that everyone has to consider is that when the Liberal movement first formed it wanted change. It's just that at the time change meant a allowing everyone to vote and supporting Industrialization/Capitalism, rather than an agrarian/feudal system. Those changes have all been made (in the West, anyways). So those who support continued change still call themselves liberals.

Conservatives do not want change. They wanted the government to remain an oligarchy and to protect the interests of the landed classes. Well, that didn't happen and eventually it became clear that we probably won't be going back. However, there were still people wanting further change (liberals) and staying the same now meant embracing society as the liberals have made it. Thus, classical liberalism does look much like today's conservatism. It's not that the Left has corrupted the meaning of liberalism it's just that the liberal movement has gradually grown from the Center or Center-Right more to the Center-Left and the conservative movement from Far-Right more to the Center or Center-Right.

I don't know if I articulated that well, but when you look at some of the history of politics (especially in Britain, which I'm most familiar with, even though I'm Canadian) that's sort of what happened.


Well said. I was a history major back in college, and I can agree that the historical record backs you up.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I'm guessing your history teacher was a left wing partisan hack, cause quite frankly Conservatives are not for an Oligarchy...



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

15 Mar 2011, 9:55 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
I'm guessing your history teacher was a left wing partisan hack, cause quite frankly Conservatives are not for an Oligarchy...

You missed the whole point of the historical development of the two political wings. What was right-wing three hundred years ago is not necessarily right-wing now, and same for left-wing. The political right, including conservatives, were for the preservation of monarchies in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The ideal of representative government in a Republic was born out of Enlightenment Liberalism, which of course is different in many respects from modern "liberalism." There has been a gradual evolution of ideologies.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,151
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

15 Mar 2011, 10:09 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
AstroGeek wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Or, you could argue that the 19th century liberals eventually evolved into the present day left by the 20th century.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I agree. The thing that everyone has to consider is that when the Liberal movement first formed it wanted change. It's just that at the time change meant a allowing everyone to vote and supporting Industrialization/Capitalism, rather than an agrarian/feudal system. Those changes have all been made (in the West, anyways). So those who support continued change still call themselves liberals.

Conservatives do not want change. They wanted the government to remain an oligarchy and to protect the interests of the landed classes. Well, that didn't happen and eventually it became clear that we probably won't be going back. However, there were still people wanting further change (liberals) and staying the same now meant embracing society as the liberals have made it. Thus, classical liberalism does look much like today's conservatism. It's not that the Left has corrupted the meaning of liberalism it's just that the liberal movement has gradually grown from the Center or Center-Right more to the Center-Left and the conservative movement from Far-Right more to the Center or Center-Right.

I don't know if I articulated that well, but when you look at some of the history of politics (especially in Britain, which I'm most familiar with, even though I'm Canadian) that's sort of what happened.


Well said. I was a history major back in college, and I can agree that the historical record backs you up.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I'm guessing your history teacher was a left wing partisan hack, cause quite frankly Conservatives are not for an Oligarchy...


Try professors (as in plural). I had several of them, and only one of them let his politics be known.
And since when have the right not been oligarchical? The very struggle between organized labor with big business has been about the left leaning many fighting against the power of the conservative few. Same with the various civil rights movements in this country - whether they be African American or some other ethnic minority, women, gays, or just about anyone else - it's a matter of the left wing ordinary people vs. the conservative few whose best interest is in holding down the people.
And by the way, I had not made any reference to oligarchies in my previous post. Just where the hell did you get that one from?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

15 Mar 2011, 11:12 pm

Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm guessing your history teacher was a left wing partisan hack, cause quite frankly Conservatives are not for an Oligarchy...

You missed the whole point of the historical development of the two political wings. What was right-wing three hundred years ago is not necessarily right-wing now, and same for left-wing. The political right, including conservatives, were for the preservation of monarchies in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The ideal of representative government in a Republic was born out of Enlightenment Liberalism, which of course is different in many respects from modern "liberalism." There has been a gradual evolution of ideologies.


Actually Orwell, the Republican ideals is rooted in Christianity. Republicans largely were against slavery on moral and religious grounds.