The recent poll on who we voted for in the primary was kind of interesting, but hard to draw a lot of conclusions from. Candidates are chosen for a lot of reasons, often conflicting, and are almost always a compromise of one kind or another. So I got to wondering what folks here would say about their deeper and more stable political preferences.
I’m hoping the answers will be the “heart of hearts” basic druthers. If somebody said “I’m a liberal/republican/commie (or whatever), what are you”, what would you say if you really wanted to tell them the truth? I realize that the choices are not really comparable in some ways — Democrat versus liberal, for example. OTOH, some people feel “Democrat” is really what they’re about, while others identify themselves as “libertarian” first, but vote Democrat as the best pragmatic alternative.
The poll choices as usual will be frustratingly lacking, so I expect the “other” category might turn out to be the most interesting one if people post comments to explain what and why that other is.
Wow 25% is like me 😀
The longer DreamofPeace’s diary stays visible, the more responses it is likely to get.
In the meantime, what is the best way to represent the political continuum graphically?
The longer DreamofPeace’s diary stays visible, the more responses it is likely to get.
I am advocating that it stays in the public eye long enough to grab a large number of respondents.
I am saying recommend it so that it stays high up on the page.
Great diary, BTW.
Thank you Athenian. You are a trouble maker 😀 and actually I would delete it but now its already gone so no need.
I have to go set up a wiki now for the women kossack refuges to brainstorm on. Have a good weekend.
It now has eight or nine diaries more recent. That does not mean that it is GONE. You can set up your page so you see the 50 most recent diaries. : )
Where’s the wiki?
Me, a troublemaker? Ask anyone. : )
Sorry, I am not able to place myself on an american political scale. Words don’t have the same meaning on our side of the Atlantic rift…
BTW, what is a libertarian socialist?
Although I think my son is one (member of the ISO on his college campus)
I’d hazard a guess and say someone that thinks the means of production (large industrial firms and utilities) should be government owned (probably preferably locally rather than nationally), but who would still allow individuals to have personal businesses as consultants, farmers, artists, etc. And someone who is libertarian on social issues like abortion, gay rights, pot smoking, etc.
If you voted that way, let us know!
(Me, I’m a green, as you probably guessed from the sig line…)
Which, of course, begs the question: “What’s a green?”
that a green is someone who puts the environment ahead of other political priorities, at least that’s what I wish it to be.
The evolution of my political thought is a road so fantastic and bizarre, that I dare not tread there.
At this point in time, beyond thinking myself as a fundamental American patriot (Free, Fair and Transparent Elections; Checks and Balances; the Constitution; the Bill of Rights –you know, all that radical far-lefty stuff), I consider myself as a libertarian in terms of most individual rights; however, knowing how unscrupulous people can be, and how absolute power corrupts absolutely, I cannot in clear conscience abide unregulated laissez-faire capitalism.
Capitalism is fine when properly regulated. And generally business operations should only be regulated to preserve individuals’ life, limb, liberty, home and pursuit of happiness (in other words, there should be a law against any business that kills, maims, or detains me, destroys my land or home, or keeps me from harmless individual pursuits).
BUT: Corporations should not be treated as the legal equals of people, with no actual people at responsible risk for the consequences of irresponsible behavior.
AND: Some things just have to be socialized/nationalized. This list is easy and obvious:
ALSO: Some things should be forcibly (if necessary) de-centralized:
There you have it: A Libertarian Socialist, although how DaveW figured out there were a few of us out here, I’ll never know.
Even I hadn’t thought about it before now…
I actually used that term accidentally to describe myself the other night (actually “social libertarian” but close enough).. I found no present moniker fitting, so I said I took some of my ideas from libertarianism (social issues) and some from socialism (or social democracy). A strong governmental system to help the less fortunate, but government staying out of private affairs.
Your description is absolutely perfect, and a big “HI!” to a fellow SL/LS 🙂
I’d say a libertarian socialist is one who wants maximum personal liberty in the personal realm but not in the economic realm. The usual American Libertarian tends to be all about no taxes and more guns.
Libertarian socialist is from a historical viewpoint a proper term for anarchists and anarcho-syndicalists. The early anarchists would never have recognized that term, they were socialists, together in the International Workingmen’s Association until the split between state socialism (represented by Marx) and libertarian socialism (by Bakunin).
To sum up, I’m a libertarian socialist. 😉
I identify as a “libertarian socialist” as well – as shocking as that might seem. wobblie indeed.
And why is socialism knee-jerkingly refered to as not wanting “personal liberty… in the economic realm?” It’s the idea of economic democracy: that the people who work for a living should have a say in what is produced, and how production occurs. The liberal concept of economic freedom as the freedom to consume has always seemed a bit limiting to me.
BTW – I’ve seen Chomsky refered to as a libertarian socialist.
There I go again – libertarian/anarchist to the death 😉
I just hope there might be ONE other Libertarian vote. If we get to a hundred votes and I am still the only Libertarian I’m going to throw a tantrum.
BTW my totally libertarian definition of Libertarian is that whatever you do in privacy is entirely your own business, providing it does not hurt anyone else. You may, however, hurt yourself. Whatever you say in private is your right totally – with NO limitations. You may say publicly anything you like, providing you are prepared to argue the scientific reasoning behind your propositions.
“You may say publicly anything you like, providing you are prepared to argue the scientific reasoning behind your propositions.”
Screw that. I’m a free speech purist. There’s an unequivocal right to expose your muddleheadedness through political speech.
Yes, I’m almost with you, but my thoughts were more aimed at Holocaust deniers etc. Some muddleheadedness can be downright dangerous in public with an uninformed audience.
I can’t think of a way around that except that opinions must always be set against scientific facts.
The creationist views for example always avoid science by confusing beliefs with verification. Religion, beliefs and philosophy are separate subjects from science. Equally valid, but different.
Science, I must add, is always a work in progress. It could be described as: theories that have been proved to be consistent in a variety of relevant tests by x number of independent testers or peer-reviewers…until some researchers come up with alternative theories that also fit the available but expanding database of facts.
Intelligent Design is a philosophical viewpoint, not a scientific one. It is outside of science. Creationism is provably ridiculous as science, and probably irrelevant as philosophy, though of course, it is a ‘belief’.
The damage they do is far less than the damage inflicted by any control mechanism that could possibly be erected to stifle them.
Feeling better, Sven? Not to say I’m a true blue Libertarian – but that’s always been the end result when I take any multi-question survey. Or, as I’ve sometimes been labeled in other surveys – Realist. But that doesn’t adequately explain my foundation, as I lean toward what may be viewed as Idealism in wanting a multi-party system with IRV.
I worked on the platform committee for the MN Independence Party, hoping for a slightly more Libertarian leaning, but I was fairly disappointed. (And my Libertarian leanings were at a state level, while consistently voting Dem at a national level. Except for John Anderson in 1980) The MN IP turned into more of a platform of consensus vs. a platform of convictions. The final straw took place when I discovered that 30% of the voting caucus thought it was a good idea to endorse Bush for reelection.
I do believe in the need for taxes as a means of supporting infrastructures. My husband is a socialist, who strongly believes in government safety nets at every turn of the road – so it makes for interesting discussion.
As someone mentioned above, I’m also intrigued by the term libertarian/socialist, and some part of me wanted to select that.
So rest assured, Sven. You do not stand alone (in theory, at least)
I guess I am probably more theoretically libertarian than practically. I am far too polite to be an anarchist 😉
I am more interested in philosphy than politics because essentially I am an elitist – meaning that democracy does not function with an uninformed one person-one vote system. Or rather it does function but produces manipulated and manipulable results.
The Fascist in me would maybe like a system where you have to answer a lot of questions to prove you understood the problems before you could vote.
But then again I also invented a tax system in which you are born with a 100% tax liability and can only reduce that by educational qualifications 😉 Double professors would have negative taxation under my system he he.
So really I am a Fascist Libertarian with intellectualist tendencies. Your husband would love Finland, as I do. It’s easy to be libertarian when education is free for all.
But the crucial question to my mind is that we always look at problems in the context of our own individual lifespans, failing to see that we are just a fleeting slice of one pattern in a complex historical system of patterns. History is oen of the most important subjects. The Modern Capitalist model fails totally on this score. Society has to invest for the long term – this is only possible under such systems as the Socialist one, in which profit/expanding economy/instant results are only one small part of the overall picture.
A healthy economy has to serve a healthy society, not the other way round.
I believe (here comes my manifesto) that culture – high and low – is the ultimate goal and achievement of society. Work and profit is only the plumbing in a building dedicated to the excpansion of the mind and the senses.
And the word to remember at all times is ‘Dignity’. Money has nothing to do with dignity. You can be poor and live in dignity. You can be rich and live in dignity.
How many of us can say that out lives are dignified?
Anyway – thank you for your support, I will wear it always (One of my father’s old jokes)
Oh my – more engaging thoughts from across the sea. Let me guess, there would also be some type of tax reductions for journalists and maybe even record producers. Sounds to me like I somewhat self-beneficial system ya got there.
Shouldn’t you be asleep?
I originally proposed my tax idea as a provocation to thinking about education. Problem was people took it seriously!
BTW I finally posted my SOS diary today. Enjoy…
Thanks for the heads up – I’m off to check it out.
Have a wonderful day (well, what’s left of it over on your side of the planet)
Libertarian? I used to identify myself that way when it was possible to use the label without being confused with apologists for the plutocrats. Now that the term is so debased here in the US I prefer “Mutalist.” The advantages are nobody knows what that means 🙂 but it has a 160 year history here in the States.
I don’t really have a good label because all these terms are outdated by modern circumstances.
As is the American system itself. Basically I think the modern world increasingly expands into territory beyond the reach of our system and much of our terminology for that matter.
So I go with liberal.
There was no choice for
Feminist Populist liberal democrat…. in that order
Political Compass poll and found it inadequate (not to mention stacked and unimaginative). Even a better implementation would be insufficient, showing up just how poor the “left-right” spectrum is. (Most people report being Gandhi after taking the poll.)
We need a good three dimensional poll and a decent metaphor to go with it. Perhaps we need a topologist who can explain how a communist becomes a brownshirt and earns the label “beefsteak Nazi, brown on the outside and red inside.”
I voted “liberal” in the poll, meaning both definitions and that is not nearly wide enough. Locally, for example, I support the New Democracy Party, the right of center ruling party, over the opposition socialist party PASOK. (Partly this results from my visceral hatred of Andreas Papandreou and partly from my feeling that Greece is suffering from too much socialism and the US from too little.) In the rest of Europe I usually support the left wing party but not always.
Inviting flames, I will say that Maggie Thatcher was a good thing for Britain and that Greece could have used her, as could a number of other countries. At least she was a leader, unlike Shroeder, Chirac and Berlusconi. Blair has saving graces. No, really. What would you have him do? The Brits have to side with the Yanks, they have no choice. Even when the Yanks are incompetent, ideological baboons.
Starting to ramble so back on topic: I’m a fiscal conservative, economic and cultural liberal, hard-headed pragmatist, libertarian on some issues and socialist on others and a determined democrat*. Maybe a landscape of peaks and valleys would be more helpful to conveying where people stand politically.
We live in a time when American politics is riven in two not by ideology but by fantasy and reality. It is infectious and I wish it would go away. The US denial of reality is poisoning world politics and distorting debates far from its shores.
* democrat = one who believes in the sovereignty of the people. Whether we agree with their choice, it must be respected, even when they elect imams or communists or themselves.
Actually, I was Colin Powell. . .
Truly thoughtful positioning of where I stand pretty much across the board. Very impressive. (Although I’d feel better had I been the first to give you a 4 before Sven did. ;^).
On a lighter note – yet in all seriousness – I inadvertently jumped from your asterisk to your sig line – rather than jumping to the appropriate counter- asterisk below. So when I initially read that you are a determined Democrat – in my mind you countered it by apologizing for the inconvenience. (But ever so briefly, please be assured.)
I guess I’m actually a chicken. I wanted to vote ‘Socialist’ but I wimped out and went ‘Democract’ at the last second. On a frickin anonymous internet poll. I don’t know what the hell’s wrong with me that I feel I need to go with the ‘safe’ option on something like this.
I think after 4+ years of this crap I’m bone tired of conflict and feeling like sh*t all the time. I won’t even talk to people (in the flesh & blood world, that is) about politics, because it just makes me so angry, which makes me tired and sad. I didn’t used to be this way. I used to like getting riled up. I guess this is what they call ‘outrage fatigue.’
Sigh.
I transcend your feeble categorization.
Ben, though I’ve given you a four earlier, in the hopes of encouraging you to contribute further, your comments might begin to be misunderstood as trolling.
Perhaps you could do more than just gainsaying and boasting?
My first response to the hypothetical question, depending on whose asking it might be:
How long you got?
Or something along the lines of…why are you asking the question?
Mostly, I say …”little ‘i” independent” — by their response to that, I can tell if they’re really interested or not.
I chose other becuase these labels are what get us all into trouble in the first place.
Now I understand that I understand that party affiliation is very important in gathering mass movements and in power politics, the short version is that I am just sick to death of what our government has become — the BEST qualification for a candidate who wants my vote is that they do NOT call themselves a politician.