Left Wing or Right Wing

Post Reply New Topic

Voting won't change anything.

Not voting won't either, so I err on the side of acting, not just sitting there.

Well put, Glebel.
I consider voting my annual act of civil disobedience.

Central banks and other institutions have a much bigger influence over society than those who are temporarily voted into office, and that's not always a bad thing, but I guess the illusion of being in charge is what keeps the masses from revolting.

I think it's a very bad thing. The notion of unelected corporate entities, often beyond the reach of the law, having power over us, is terrifying.

We are not talking exclusively about corporate entities, which are not necessarily a problem in themselves, but about deep-rooted societal structures and institutions, which could include corporate entities.

Is something wrong

Mostly left I suppose...but I guess it sort of depends on the issue.

The founding fathers were a heterogonous group of people. Most of he founding fathers were Christians of various different denominations, and there was a significant minority of deists an other religious affiliations. But what tended to unite and guide their political designs for the nations were their philosophies and political philosophies. This was largely dominated by Republicanism and Natural Rights Theory.
The separation of church and state espoused by the Founding Fathers was not a separation of religious and political considerations or a banishment of religious matters from the public square. It was about separating "The Church" from "The State". As in, keeping the organizations of the government and the organizations of organized religion independent of each other. They tended to believe that tying together these organizations lead to weakness and corruption for both. They also tended to think that free association in religion was good for the spiritual individuals and religious denominations. The point of their separation of church and state was to say that the government would not have an official national church, that it would not mandate or prohibit people from associating with any religious denomination, and that people, individual and collective, have freedom of association and freedom of exercise in religious matters. As it is stated in the First Amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
This seperation of church and state dos not mandate a separation of religious and political matters in people in office. The holders of office, politicians, and civil activists are free to hold their positions, and to support or oppose things, for whatever reason they see fit; including religious reasons. This is evidenced by article 6 of the constitution, which state that no religious test shall be made as a qualification for holding office. When they debated this section they acknowledged that this would allow people of any religious belief to enter office and potentially allow their religious beliefs to influence politics.
Back in their times their where those who tried to abolish religion from the public square, to which John Adams stated that those who wished to remove religion from the public square were as extreme as those who wanted to establish a theocracy.
Furthermore, during the period of the founding fathers, like in other times, there was plenty of religious and philosophic debate. Members of the founding fathers were involved in such debates. They had similarities and differences in views amongst them. Many offered critiques of various theological and theo-political issues. But most of them would not be adequately described as very critical of religion. Though a significant number of them were highly critical of organized religion (they tended not to like the kind of highly bureaucratized church organizations that 17th and 18th century Europe had) and theocracy.

When it comes to the distribution of wealth and power I am, as I like to say, 'to the Left of Lenin', but on certain social issues (ex. gay 'marriage') I'm probably more right-wing than most U.S. Republicans. I guess you could say I'm an old-fashioned Stalinist.

Most aspies I've met outside of WP are also on the Left, have a weird collage/mix of Libertarian-leaning views that doesn't quite fit neatly under anything, or are just apolitical. I think it's partially our vulnerability that we typically latch on to leftist politics, and that's fine, but I also think, especially amongst aspies under 30, that our interests probably play a role in that. I've never met a single or unmarried anime-loving gamer aspie who was also a neo-con Judeo-Christian capitalist. I wouldn't be surprised if the same narrative that draws young aspies to anime and video game culture, also draws them to the narrative of the Left.

I hate anime! And gamers are terrible!

Yeah I can't stand 99% of anime myself, and while I play a few video games, can't stand most gamers or gamer culture.

ambidextrous

I was once infiltrated with a communistic leaning mindset on the economy whilst upholding a moderate stance on social and domestic policies until the age of 14 or 15. As of today for the past two years I would now be considered a conservative minarchist (Conservative Libertarianism) and a strident individualist in the tradition of the Austrian Economists Ludwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard, but I am still a perennial agnostic non-theist (from birth) since decamping my antecedently populist views and my questionable “loyalty” to the supercilious skeptic community (e.g. “Rationalwiki” or New Atheists), although I still retain a preponderant share of the inferences of such self-proclaimed conformist “freethinkers” (other than things like debunker groupthink, cultural Marxism, transhumanism and collectivism).

I’m staunchly critical of the hypersexualization and pseudo-individualization of millennial youth culture, new social movements, emancipatory identity politics (both on the left and right), materialistic consumerism (exacerbated by Keynesianism, collectivist entitlement mentalities, the digital age, and dumbed down culture); nevertheless, I repudiate the notion of proscribing against the nihilistic abhorrences of moral relativism and social progressivisms like gay marriage, sodomy, bigamy, recreational drug use, pornography as it’s none of my personal entanglements.

Although libertarianism is conspicuously prevalent (whether they are anarcho-collectivist Chomskyites or Randian Objectivists), most autistics and aspies (especially within the neurodiversity movement) are naturally propensified to progressive collectivist ideologies due to a possibly nurtured collective mentality (despite reluctance to conform other than private in-group identity politics, usually derived from online forums) from social justice awareness and are therefore skeptical of individualist conceptualizations such as free will, natural law, propertarianism, individual liberty and the rule of law which tend to be ordained by a governed constitution.

ASD individuals can believe in any political/religious ideology (I've heard of one on a forum who identifies as a Christian Reconstructionist), but I've never heard of one such individual who believed in neo-conservatism. My postulation for the crony state monopolistic corporatist system is attributed to our debt based fiat monetary system, friedmanite monetarism, governmentally administered free trade agreements (NAFTA, WTO - no voluntary transactions), centralized banking (Federal Reserve, Bank of England), fiat currency, fractional reserve banking and the intergovernmental supranationalist financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, which I believe are all an intercessive and counterproductive antithesis of a true laissez faire enterprise economy.

Libertarian with some left leaning tendencies.